AGRI-TOURISM: AS A NEW ELEMENT OF COUNTRY PLANNING

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES
OF
MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

BY

ELİF DEMİRBAŞ TOPCU

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR
THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN URBAN DESIGN
IN
CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING

OCTOBER 2007
 Approval of the thesis

“AGRI-TOURISM: AS A NEW ELEMENT OF RURAL

DEVELOPMENT”

submitted by ELİF DEMİRBAŞ TOPCU in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Urban Design
Department, Middle East Technical University by,

Prof. Dr. Canan Özgen

Dean, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences

Prof. Dr. Melih Ersoy

Head of Department, City and Regional Planning Dept., METU

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Baykan Günay

Supervisor, City and Regional Planning Dept., METU

Examining Committee Members:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. H. Çağatay Keskinok

City and Regional Planning Dept., METU

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Baykan Günay

City and Regional Planning Dept., METU

Prof. Dr. Mehmet Ecevit

Department of Sociology, METU

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Emin Barış

Landscape Architecture Department, Ankara University

Asst. Prof. Dr. Z. Müge Akkar Ercan

City and Regional Planning Dept., METU

Date: 08.10. 2007

I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and
presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also
declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and
referenced all material and results that are not original to this work.

Name, Last name: Elif DEMİRBAŞ TOPCU

Signature:

iii
 ABSTRACT

AGRI-TOURISM: AS A NEW ELEMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Demirbaş Topcu, Elif

MS., City and Regional Planning Department, Urban Design
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Baykan Günay

October 2007, 187 Pages

This thesis study is developed under the lights of new developments related to
rural tourism sector in the world. With the effects of emerging term
‘sustainability’ in 1980s, sustainable tourism concept has found new
implementation areas. The increasing demand on the tourism activities taking
place in rural areas has lead the governments to find ways of benefiting from this
tendency in a sustainable way.

Since the early 1990s, a new type of rural tourism called as agri-tourism has been
developed as a concept that integrates agriculture and tourism activities in the
western world. Whether it is evaluated as a tourism or agriculture development
element, it is a new element of country planning. Nowadays, it is seen that there is
also a new tendency for agri-tourism at local level through local initiatives in
Turkey. Although there is still no governmental regulation for agri-tourism
activities, political and practical developments demonstrate that the sector should
be evaluated as a planning element for Turkey.

The main purpose of this study is examining the planning element characteristic
of agri-tourism concept as an element for enhancing the rural tourism activities in
Turkey. To achieve the purpose of planning element characteristic of agri-
tourism, two examples from EU- Lublin and Tuscany Regions were examined to
understand the dynamics of agri-tourism as a planning element. For these study

iv
interpretative-comparative-textual method is used. Accordingly, the present
condition in Turkey is evaluated through the obtained data and SWOT Analysis
method was employed for analyzing the data. Accordingly, some suggestions are
presented for developing agri-tourism sector in Turkey.

Keywords: Agri-tourism, rural tourism, alternative tourism, sustainable tourism,

rural development

v
 ÖZ

AGRO-TURİZM: YENİ BİR KIRSAL KALKINMA ELEMANI

Demirbaş Topcu, Elif

YL, Şehir ve Bölge Planlama Bölümü, Kentsel Tasarım
Tez Yöneticisi: Doç. Dr. Baykan Günay

Ekim 2007, 187 Sayfa

Bu tez çalışması, kırsal turizm sektöründeki yeni gelişmeler ışığı altında

geliştirilmiştir. 1980’li yıllarda sürdürülebilirlik kavramının doğmasıyla birlikte
sürdürülebilir turizm kavramı da doğmuştur. Kırsal alanlardaki turizm
aktivitelerine artan ilgi, hükümetleri bu eğilimden sürdürülebilir bir şekilde
faydalanmaya yönlendirmiştir.

1990’lı yılların erken dönemlerinden beri batı dünyasında agro-turizm adı verilen,
tarım ve turizm aktivitelerini birleştiren bir turizm türü gelişmiştir.Görülmektedir
ki, sadece gelişmiş ülkelerde değil, gelişmekte olan ülkelerde de bu turizm
türünden alternatif kalkınma amacıyla faydalanılmaktadır. Son zamanlarda
Türkiye’de de bu turizm türüne yerel seviyelerde artan bir ilginin olduğu
bilinmektedir. Her ne kadar Türkiye’de henüz agro-turizm aktiviteleriyle ilgili
olarak yasal düzenleme yoluna gidilmediyse de politika ve uygulama
alanlarındaki gelişmeler Türkiye’de bu sektörden planlama elemanı olarak
faydalanılabileceğini göstermektedir.

Bu çalışmanın ana amacı agro-turizm kavramının planlama elemanı olma

özelliğini incelemektir. Bu amaçla Lublin ve Toskana Bölgeleri’ndeki agro-
turizm uygulamaları incelenmiştir. Bu çalışmada yorumlayıcı-karşılaştırmalı-
metinsel bir yöntem kullanılmıştır.Ardından elde edilen bilgiler ışığında
Türkiye’deki mevcut durum incelenmiştir.Bu çalışmada, görüşme ve gözlem
tekniği kullanılarak elde edilen bilgiler SWOT Analiz tekniği kullanılarak analiz

vi
edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak sektörün Türkiye’de geliştirilebilmesi için öneriler
sunulmuştur.

Anahtar kelimeler: Agro-turizm, kırsal turizm, alternatif turizm, sürdürülebilir

turizm, kırsal kalkınma

vii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis study depends on the supports, efforts and helps of a number of people
whom I should thank so much.

I thank to my advisor Assoc. Prof Dr. Baykan Günay for his endless supports and
guidance. Also I am grateful to Prof. Dr. Mehmet Ecevit, Assoc. Prof. Dr. H.
Çağatay Keskinok, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Emin Barış and Asst. Prof. Dr. Z. Müge
Akkar Ercan for their guidance to arrive the end.

I should submit a very special thank to Prof. Dr. Öner Demirel, my greatest guider
since 1997, for his sympathy, supports and friendship whenever I need.

Nedim Zurnacı and Zehra Ömerler were the two main actors of completing the
case study. They submit their interests, times, efforts and sympathy every time. I
know it could be harder to complete without them. Also I must thank to Sonia
J.L.D'hondt EREM, Mehtap Tuna and Talat Zurnacı for their helps.

Dr. Elif Karaosmanoğlu sent her supports and positive energy from İstanbul
whenever I need. I am very happy and proud of being friend with her.

My dear mother and father… Feeling your love and support is the power making
me go on…

And lastly, Ergin Topcu… Life is more beautiful and brighter with you… It is
insufficient to tell my thanks with the words for everything. I know we will
achieve the greater ones together. Thank you very much...

Thank you all…

viii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT………………………………………….……..iv
ÖZ……………………………………………………….…...v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..……………………………....viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS…...………………………………ix
LIST OF TABLES………………………………………….xi
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………..xii
LIST OF MAPS…………………………………………...xiii
ABBREVATIONS…………………………....…………..xiv
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION………………………………….……. 1
2. INTRODUCTION TO AGRI-TOURISM………………10
2.1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................. 10
2.2. DEVELOPMENT OF TOURISM SECTOR AS AN ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT INSTRUMENT ............................................................... 10
2.3. TOURISM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT .......................................... 12
2.3.1. What is Rural Development? ........................................... 13
2.3.2. Rural Tourism .................................................................. 19
2.4. TOURISM PLANNING...................................................................... 20
2.4.1. What is planning?............................................................. 21
2.4.2. Tourism Planning Concepts ............................................. 22
2.5. AGRI-TOURISM AS A PLANNING ELEMENT .................................... 24
2.5.1. Development of Agri-tourism.......................................... 24
2.5.2. Definitions and Approaches for Agri-tourism ................. 25
2.5.3.Agri-tourism and planning ................................................ 31
2.5.4. Agricultural dimension of agri-tourism ........................... 39
2.5.5. Agri-tourism as an economic development instrument ... 40
2.5.6. Socio-cultural dimension of agri-tourism ........................ 41
2.5.7. Educational dimension of agri-tourism............................ 42
2.5.8. Agri-tourism as a gender approach .................................. 43
2.6. CONCLUSION ................................................................................. 44
3. AGRI-TOURISM IN EUROPE: TWO CASES…………45
3.1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................. 45

ix
 3.2. AN OVERVIEW FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN EUROPE.. 45
3.3. RURAL TOURISM IN EUROPE ......................................................... 53
3.4. AGRI-TOURISM IN POLAND AND ITALY ......................................... 56
3.4.1. An Overview to Rural Tourism sector in Poland............. 56
3.4.2. Agri-tourism Development in Lublin Region .................. 62
3.4.3. The Planning Mechanisms of The Rural Tourism
Development Process in Lublin Region..................................... 65
3.5. AGRI-TOURISM IN ITALY ............................................................... 68
3.5.1. An Overview for Agri-tourism Sector in Italy................. 68
3.5.2. Agri-tourism Development in the Tuscany Region ......... 69
3.6. CONCLUSION ................................................................................. 74
4. AGRI-TOURISM IN TURKEY…………………………80
4.1.INTRODUCTION............................................................................... 80
4.2. RURAL DEVELOPMENT APPROACH IN TURKEY ............................. 81
4.3. THE REPUBLIC PERIOD - (1923-1950)........................................... 85
4.4. THE FIRST LIBERAL PERIOD - (1950-1963):.................................. 87
4.5. THE PERIOD OF STATE PLANNING ORGANIZATION / THE TERM OF
FIVE YEAR DEVELOPMENT PLANS - (1963 -) ....................................... 87
4.5.1. Legislative-Regulative Mechanism Related To Agri-
tourism Development in Turkey ................................................ 87
4.6. CONCLUSION ................................................................................. 94
5. RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY………………….97
5.1. MATERIAL..................................................................................... 97
5.2. CASE STUDY AREAS....................................................................... 98
5.3. METHOD ....................................................................................... 99
5.4.CASE STUDY ................................................................................. 100
5.4.1. Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism Development Project
.................................................................................................. 101
5.4.2.Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project ....... 126
5.5. RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS............................................................ 140
6. CONCLUSION…………………………………………155
6.1. FINDINGS .................................................................................... 155
6.2. SUGGESTIONS.............................................................................. 160
REFERENCES…………………………………………….167
APPENDICIES
A. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE PROJECT COORDINATORS:…..185
B.INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE AGRI-TOURISM
ENTREPRENEURS:…………………………………………………………...187

x
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Increasing tourist numbers in the period of mass tourism ..................... 12

Table 2: Different levels of rural development analysis ...................................... 17
Table 3: Two examples of key interfaces in rural development .......................... 52
Table 4: Comparison of entrepreneurial motivations in Ireland and Poland ....... 58
Table 5: Positive and negative characteristics of Polish Rural Tourism Strategies
....................................................................................................................... 60
Table 6: SWOT Analyses for Lublin Region....................................................... 64
Table 7: Table presents Tuscany in numbers ....................................................... 70
Table 8: Differences and similarities between Lublin and Tuscany Regions ...... 75
Table 9: Agri-tourism development and management process............................ 76
Table 10: Tourist numbers, tourism revenues and tourism shares of the sector
between 1980-2001 ....................................................................................... 80
Table 11: SWOT matrix of the rural areas in Turkey ......................................... 83
Table 12: Changing population of rural and urban areas in Turkey between the
years of 1927-2003........................................................................................ 84
Table 13: Number of local and foreign tourists accommodated in hotels in Manisa
City.............................................................................................................. 102
Table 14: Number of local and foreign tourists visited museums and historical
sites of Manisa City..................................................................................... 103
Table 15: The agricultural production area amounts in Tekelioğlu Village ...... 105
Table 16: Legend / Map 4 .................................................................................. 109
Table 17: Identification card of the Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Project ......................................................................................................... 115
Table 18: SWOT Matrix of Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development Initiative 119
Table 19: Legend / Map 7 ................................................................................. 129
Table 20: Cooperative member, accommodation unit and bed numbers of
Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative................................................. 132
Table 21: Turkish and foreign tourist numbers for three years visit the Karaburun
Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project ...................................................... 133
Table 22: Tourists numbers according to the nationality................................... 133
Table 23: Identification Card of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative
Project ......................................................................................................... 134
Table 24: SWOT Matrix of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project136
Table 25: Comparation between the two projects for evaluating the factors that
may effect on agri-tourism planning studies in Turkey .............................. 141

xi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Two components of sustainable rural development constitute agri-

tourism .......................................................................................................... 27
Figure 2: Four types of cooperation necessary for the development of successful
integrative tourism, ....................................................................................... 37
Figure 3: Figure exposes the three dimension of rural development issue.......... 53
Figure 4: Figure of Agri-tourism Development Processes in Lublin Region ...... 67
Figure 5: Sheme of Agri-tourism Development Processes in Tuscany Region... 73
Figure 6: General structure of SWOT Analysis................................................. 100

xii
 LIST OF MAPS

Map 1: Map of the Lublin- Lubelska Region....................................................... 63

Map 2: Tuscany Map ........................................................................................... 71
Map 3: Transportation map of Tekelioğlu Village and Karaburun District....... 101
Map 4: Location Map of Salihli District and Tekelioğlu village ....................... 110
Map 5: Location of Karaburun District.............................................................. 130

xiii
 ABBREVATIONS

AOÇ: Atatürk Orman Çiftliği (Atatürk Forest Farm)

BC: Before Christmas
CAP: Common Agricultural Policies
ÇOB: Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı (Ministry of Environment and Forest)
DIE: Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü (National Istatistic Institute)
EAGGF: European Agricultural Guidance And Guarantee Fund
EC: European Commission
ECEAT: European Center for Ecological and Environmental Tourism
ERDF: European Regional Development Funds
ERDP: European Rural Development Policies
ESF: European Social Funds
EU: European Union
FIFG: European Instrument for Fisheries Guidance
KTB: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı (Ministry of Culture and Tourism)
LAG: Local Action Group
LEADER: Links Between Actions for the Development of Rural Economy
NGO: Non-Governmental Organization
OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
TKB: Tarım ve Köy İşleri Bakanlığı (Ministry of Agriculture)
UKFIT: Polish State Sport and Tourism Administration
UN: United Nations
USA:United States of America
WTO: World Tourism Organization

xiv
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

It is generally known that, tourism is one of the biggest economic sectors in the
world. Traveling to some other parts of the world is gaining more importance
because of various reasons; therefore, several effective changes are taking place in
the supply of tourism sector all over the world.

Although some broad definitions of the term tourism implies the explanations
including the definitions about the leisure activities; the sector has evolved from
the primary traveling activities to today’s contemporary popular facilities in
recent years through the new demands. The necessities such as health, education,
sports organizations, religion, shopping, trade and so on are providing new
directions to tourism sector through the possibilities of globalization of
knowledge and more efficient traveling facilities.

Reviewing literature about the tourism sector demonstrates the changes in

traveling attitude, decrease in the seasonality feature of tourism and ‘active
holidays depending on culture, nature, traditional way of life have become the
objectives of new tourists’ (Tezcan, 2004) and the economic, social and
environmental impacts on the area where the tourism activity taking place in.

Increase in tourist demands on nature-based areas leads to be served more tourism

activities day by day and this situation leads the governments benefit from this
increasing actual tourism tendency in a conservative manner, because the demand
causes damages on the nature, in other words on the tourism products. Since
tourism sector is one of the crucial instruments for the economic growth,
especially in the developing countries, it tends to describe and develop various
types of tourism activities, and plan them whether at global, national or regional

1
level but in a sustainable manner. This is not only for making it a profitable
sector, but also for protecting the tourism resources to render them long lasting
against the possible harmful impacts of the tourism activities due to the tourism
development plans.

Nowadays, ‘all inclusive’ holiday approach of mass tourism is one of the negative
factors effecting the economic survival of local small-scale entrepreneurs (Uçkun
& Türkay, 2003) through its feature of leading the tourists stay in the facility
during their holiday. Therefore, it leads following specific tourism development
approaches distinct from mass tourism development for developing new sub-
sectors of tourism, which are named as alternative tourism.

However, providing sustainable tourism approaches gain more importance to

make the sector sustainable by protecting the tourism resources and this situation
leads the governments constituting regulations and new approaches for the sector.
At this point, the term of sustainability submits new approaches for the tourism
sector not only protecting the present tourism resources but also evaluating and
creating some of the nature-based, new products as the sustainable tourism
products.

Alternative tourism presents new markets and alternative income possibilities for
the local people through the alternative, nature-based tourism products.
Mountains, forests, coasts, rivers and lakes, natural monuments, plantations,
animal resources, climate, geological structure and thermal resources are the
general resources that serve to tourism sector (Olalı et. al., 1983).

Also it should be said that alternative tourism creates a new economic opportunity
for nature-based and rural areas. This situation leads to the relation between
development and tourism in rural areas. However, this economic relation causes
creating a number of tourism types in rural areas.

2
Rural tourism, a type of nature-based tourism, developing on the rural regions
makes the sector gain many tourism facilities through the cultural, environmental
and historical richness of the rural areas. In a rural context, the growing pressure
emerging from the development-intensive nature of tourism, and the expansion of
mass tourism, has introduced many new pressures as ‘new tourism’ discovers the
qualities of rural environments (Hall&Page, 2002).

Agri-tourism is a new type of rural tourism, which is generally implemented in

disadvantaged agricultural lands. It is developed as a sector with the aim of not
only a development instrument for local people who are dependent on agricultural
production but also for sustaining the agricultural lands. In some countries like
Italy, Spain, Greece it is a growing sector with the policies of the governments
aiming to benefit from it as a regional development instrument.
Agri-tourism sector is growing under the integration of principles of
sustainability, rural development and tourism development not only in the
developed countries but also in developing ones.

Across the United States, agri-tourism is emerging as an important product

and market diversification strategy for farmers. It provides much needed
cash flow to many farms challenged by declining profitability. It provides
much needed cash flow to many farms challenged by declining profitability.
The United States Department of Agriculture has estimated that more than
62 million Americans, age 16 or older, visited a farm between 2000 and
2001. An estimated 20 million children under the age of 16 also visited a
farm at some point during this period. The Purdue Tourism Hospitability
Research Center projects that between 1997 and 2007, nature and
agricultural –based tourism will be the fastest growing segment of the travel
and tourism industry (Schilling et. al., 2006).

Another information about the tourism numbers in rural areas in European Union
(EU) says,

It is estimated that tourism in rural areas makes up 10-20% of all tourism

activities and a Eurobarometer (1998) survey report shows that 23% of
European holidaymakers choose the countryside as a destination every year
(Djekic & Vucic, 2007).

3
Nowadays, in Turkey some recent developments are occurring related to the agri-
tourism development in the political and practical areas. Because the rural
development issue is one of the main problems that has to be solved in the process
of inclusion to the European Union, nowadays there is more emphasis on the
legislative and regulative literature about alternative tourism, rural tourism and
agri-tourism as an alternative tool. In the rural development programs and strategy
documents of Eighth Five-year Development Plan, the existence of rural tourism
potential in some rural areas and regions and their potential powers for
diversifying the rural economy are emphasized. It is also declared that agri-
tourism will be strongly supported as one of the rural development strategies.
There are also a number of agri-tourism enterprises developing with volunteer
initiatives at local level and these activities demonstrate the desires of local
people and local administrations that want to benefit from the facilities of rural
tourism in Turkey. Karaburun Village in İzmir, Kalecik District in Ankara and
Tekelioğlu Village in Salihli as priorities for Turkey that serve some services such
as accommodation, tasting and buying local foods which are called as agri-
tourism by the local people and administration.

Another and the mostly known, because of the media effect, project in Turkey is
the Buğday Association’s ‘Ecological Farm Holidays’ project known as Ta-Tu-Ta
Project. It is a cooperative project of volunteer farmers and non-governmental
organization (NGO) aiming to promote ecological lifestyle. This project claims
that farmer will benefit from agri-tourism by producing organic products
(www.bugday.com).

Although these examples still do not have effectiveness on the tourism sector and
these formations are still far away from a conscious about the principles of agri-
tourism as a tourism-planning or rural development element, they have
importance with the identity of having the priority role in agri-tourism
development in Turkey.

4
This master thesis has been formed under the lights of these underpinnings related
to the agri-tourism sector in the world and Turkey. The information gathered from
the literature reviews about theoretical conditions and pre-interviews about the
practical developments in Turkey indicate that agri-tourism should be evaluated
as a planning element in rural development plans.

However, the problems of what agri-tourism is and how Turkey should benefit
from agri-tourism are still undetermined issues in the Turkish administrative and
legislative area. Therefore, the existing agri-tourism initiatives are in a non-
planned, spontaneous development manner. Although these initiatives provide
alternative income resources for rural people and present alternatives for the rural
tourism demanders, the planning studies are necessary for not only preventing the
threats of non-planed tourism activities but also for providing a strong, sustainable
basement for the sector’s development in Turkey.

Therefore, agri-tourism as a planning element constitutes the main subject of this

study.

1. Purpose of the study

The overall aim of this study is to examine the planning element characteristic of
agri-tourism concept as an element for enhancing the rural tourism activities in
Turkey. Related with the overall aim, the study has three specific objectives:

• Examining what agri-tourism is and making understand the relationship

between development, planning and tourism through the aim of
identifying the main characteristics of agri-tourism concept
• Examining the required mechanisms for agri-tourism planning
• Examining the present legal and practical conditions of the sector in
Turkey and presenting some suggestions for the sector’s development in
Turkey

5
2. Research question
The research question of this study is formed according to the following
proposition: ‘Agri-tourism should be evaluated as a planning element for rural
development issue in Turkey’, under the information of current political and
practical developments in Turkey. Accordingly, the main research question of the
study asks, ‘How should Turkey benefit from agri-tourism as part of long-term
planning?’

3. Scope of the study

This study is realized under the three stages following each other. First of all the
theoretical framework stage is prepared for exposing the theoretical basis of the
agri-tourism concept to determine the relationship between agri-tourism,
development and planning principles.

Secondly, after the theoretical framework of the study, to ascertain the needed
mechanisms for an agri-tourism planning process, agri-tourism concept is
reviewed and exposed as a planning element through two examples from Europe,
Lublin Region-Poland and Tuscany Region-Italy. Europe is chosen for the
research area since it is one of the most successful examples for agri-tourism
enterprises in the world. Furthermore, Turkey’s Europe membership process
entails to focus on rural development and reformation issues. Through this second
stage, the mechanisms acting in the process from the decision-making to
implementation and their relations are ascertained for characterizing the life cycle
of agri-tourism planning process.

Poland-Lublin Region and Italy-Tuscany Region cases were ascertained through

the two main aim of benefiting from agri-tourism. Lublin Region is preferred with
its rural tourism development identity and Tuscany Region is chosen through its
agricultural development identity.

6
Governance type of the regions is the other criteria focusing on these regions.
Poland has up-to-bottom governance whereas Italy has bottom-to-up one. This
criterion is prefered to demonstrate the importance of the community involvement
in the decision-making process. It shows the contemporary approach that is
‘Planning for the residents of an area and they should be given the opportunity to
participate in the planning of its future development and express their views on
the type of future community they want to live in’ (Inskeep, 1991, p: 27)

At the third stage, current legislative conditions and practical dimensions of agri-
tourism sector in Turkey are examined. Through two case studies, Karaburun
Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project and Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism
Development Project current condition of the sector is investigated. This
investigation helped the researcher to triangulate information from the planning
studies analyzed. Accordingly, suggestions are provided for developing the sector
in Turkey according to the Turkish rural development approach.

4. Method
In the first stage of the study interpretative-textual data collecting method is used
to make understand the theoretical framework of agri-tourism concept. Articles
and books related to rural development, tourism planning approaches and agri-
tourism development, EU and Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) reports about rural tourism and rural development, internet
resources and web-sites of agri-tourism initiatives are benefited to collect the
required data.

In the second stage of the study, interpretative-comparative-textual method is

used to demonstrate the planning mechanisms of agri-tourism sector through two
comparative examples from Europe. Poland- Lublin Regions and Italy- Tuscany
Rgions are examined and compared through their distinct development
approaches (up-to-bottom and bottom-to-up) and aims (tourism development and

7
agricultural development). Interpretative-comparative-textual method provided
making see the common approaches and necessities of agri-tourism planning.

Third stage of the study is constituted by two approaches. To ascertain the

theoretical conditions related to agri-tourism development in Turkey
interpretative-textual method is used as the data collecting method. To ascertain
the practical conditions related to agri-tourism initiatives in Turkey a comparative
case study is employed. Interview and observation method is used as the data
collecting method. For analyzing the data that were collected through the
interviews and observations SWOT Analysis is used. SWOT Analysis has
provided:

• Demonstrating the current conditions of agri-tourism initiatives in Turkey

• Inferences to make suggestions for the agri-tourism planning studies that
will be done in Turkey

Conclusion
The first chapter of this study has the purpose of presenting an introduction to
agri-tourism concept according to the theoretical framework. Following the
theoretical framework, emergence and characteristic features of agri-tourism
concept are examined through the general theoretical review and its relationship
with planning concept are exposed.

The second chapter examines the planning element characteristic of agri-tourism

sector as an element for enhancing the rural development activities. It is reviewed
through Lublin and Tuscany Region examples after presenting the general
situation of agri-tourism sector in EU. Under the data obtaining through the
examples, the planning mechanisms and their relationships effecting the planning
process are determined.

8
In the third chapter, past and current legal and practical situation of rural tourism
and agri-tourism planning in Turkey are reviewed and interpreted for determining
the current conditions of the planning mechanisms which are described in the
second chapter for agri-tourism development. In this chapter, five-year
development plans and laws and official programs related to the agri-tourism and
rural tourism are reviewed.

In the fourth chapter, a case study is submitted through two cases of Tekelioğlu
Village Rural Tourism Development Project and Karaburun Women Agri-tourism
Project. Through these cases, it is aimed to ascertain the general developmental
situation of the projects through SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and
Threat) analysis. Then, the results that are identified through SWOT analysis to
ascertain the general properties of agri-tourism development in Turkey and some
recommendations for the development of sector are discussed.

In the conclusion chapter, a brief summary of entire study and the evaluation of
the hypothesis of the study through the results of the case study are provided in
the first section. In the second section of the chapter some suggestions are
submitted for the development of agri-tourism sector in Turkey.

9
 CHAPTER 2

INTRODUCTION TO AGRI-TOURISM

2.1. Introduction
It is now generally accepted that international tourism constitutes one of the most
significant of global trade flows (Lickorish and Jenkins, 1997, p: 63). From the
primary times to today’s contemporary tourism concept, sector had several
development stages according to the conditions of the related terms.

2.2. Development of Tourism Sector as an Economic Development

Instrument
In her study, Özgüç (2003, p: 202-224) categorizes the development processes of
tourism sector in four groups on the basis of the European example, which is
formed by the industrial revolution and its reforming impacts about the life and
working conditions of the people as:

• The period of industrial revolution (1750-1830):

The period is explained with the social conditions of working class.
Because of the hard living conditions of working class, traveling was the
action of the rich classes as a luxury. Özgüç (2003, p: 209) determines
although these traveling activities were not tourism activities, as we
understand today, the emergence of guesthouses for travelers was the
primary example for the commercial accommodation units.
• The period of the growth in the internal and external tourism facilities
(1830-1900):
This period was the period of reforms in the working hours conditions that
provided workers some leisure times. These leisure times provide travel

10
 opportunities by the technological developments on transportation such as
railways and present easier and more comfortable traveling facilities.
Therefore, in this period, emergence of the primary tourism activities leads
to new economical developments. The first tour operations and
establishment of traveling agencies in this period are the important
developments for the today’s tourism sector. Thomas Cook was the first
who established tour agency presenting tour operations from Leicester to
Loughborough by the possibilities of railway systems (Özgüç, 2003, p:
211). Then several enterprises started to establish. These developments are
also important evidences for the relationships between economic
conditions, leisure times and development of tourism sector.
• The period of the widening (expansion) in the international tourism
(1900-1950):
This period is important with the effect of two world wars. Although the
wars caused to big economic problems in the world, the invention of the
automobile provided opportunities for easier transportation conditions as
one of the most important stage of tourism development process.
• The period of international mass tourism (1950- ):
Especially the years between 1950-1960s are the years of recovering the
economic conditions that the II. World War caused. After this period,
increase in the automobile numbers and improving the life conditions lead
to the growing of the sector in the following years.

Table 1 exposes the growth of the mass tourism industry through the increasing
numbers of tourists and its economic power on the world’s economy and as
Lickorish and Jenkins (1997, p: 63) assert, ‘There are no grounds for suggesting
that future global demand will decline’. Lickorish and Jenkins (1997, p: 63-75),
categorize the main economic impacts of tourism in four groups as, ‘foreign
exchange earnings, contributions to government revenues, generation of
employment and income, and stimulation to regional development’.

11
 Table 1: Increasing tourist numbers in the period of mass tourism

Years Tourist Tourism

Number incomes
(billion $)
1950 25 300 000 2.1
1960 69 300 000 6.9
1965 112 800 000 11.6
1970 160 000 000 17.9
1975 214 400 000 40.7
1980 288 000 000 102.4
1985 329 600 000 118.1
1990 457 600 000 263.6
1991 463 300 000 276.1
1992 502 300 000 313.5
1993 518 200 000 321.0
1994 549 500 000 352.6
1995 565 400 000 405.8
1996 595 000 000 433.9
1997 618 200 000 439.7
1998 636 600 000 441.0
1999 649 900 000 454.6
2000 697 500 000 476.0
2001 692 700 000 462.2
Source: Table is taken from Özgüç (2003, p: 217)

To sum up, tourism sector has grown as one of the biggest economic sectors,
which leads to increasing welfare, higher leisure times, and usable income. With
the effects of the changing opportunities of developing technology that effects on
the transportation skills, tourism sector will go on to develop as one of the biggest
development instruments for not only developing countries, but also for
developed countries.

2.3. Tourism and Rural Development

In recent years, parallel with the increasing demands for alternative types of
tourism, especially taking place in non-urban areas, and the tendencies of
governmental studies with the aim of benefiting from these demands present
alternative development facilities for local people. Today, rural tourism industry is

12
one of the developing alternative types of tourism with the several types of rural
tourism. Understanding what rural tourism is helps to understand its relation with
rural development.

The first step should be explaining the debate about what rural land is and the
criteria determining the term ‘rural’ before examining the rural development
concept.

2.3.1. What is Rural Development?

Determining the term rural development still has confusion in the various
literatures. There are definitions explaining the term but there is still difficulty to
identify the term in a quantitative way. The OECD approach for the issue is the
most accepted and reasonable one for some countries. However, it may be said
that the common element of these definitions of the term rural is ‘nature’ and the
common value of these approaches is ecology.
Difficulty comes from the inappropriateness of the various definitions of the term.
For example, through the definitions according to the population may render some
urban areas as rural. Therefore, rural areas also have the characterization of
decreasing or stagnant demographic and economic conditions (Turistik
Düzenleme, 1983).

In third direction, OECD describes the rural land as population density of the
territory with less than 150 inhabitants / km² and identifies three main groups:

1. Predominantly Rural Regions

2. Predominantly Urbanized Regions
3. Significantly Rural Regions

OECD describes the Predominantly Rural Regions by the characteristics of the

lowest population densities, incomes, older populations and the least adequate

13
basic services. Predominantly urbanized regions are described according to the
feature of the population having employment bases in secondary and tertiary
sectors and the regions likely to face potential threats to the environment, social
and cultural heritage.

And in the third group, Significantly Rural Regions are determined by the
properties of variety in economic and social vitality and the economy depending
on the primary and secondary sectors and large- scale farming.

However, behind the disadvantageous conditions of rural areas for their

inhabitants, these regions are also under the recreational demand of urban people
and this increasing demand make the regions to be considered as more
problematic with less suitable conditions for economic survival and this causes
negative impacts not only on their regions but also on the whole due to
consequences such as migration, environmental damages, decrease in the water
resources. Therefore, producing solutions for the rural areas experts emphasize
the vital role of urban areas. Therefore, ‘United Nations (UN), World Bank, EU,
NGOs and governments should allocate more resources, knowledge and time for
rural development’ (II.Tarım Şurası Commission Report of Rural Development).

II. Tarım Şurası Commission Report of Rural Development Policies indicates that
the term of society development is used and defined by UN for the first time and
interprets this definition for the rural development approach. Report asserts that
rural development approach aims integrating the enterprises of small communities
to improve their economic, social and cultural conditions through the efforts of
the states and also aims establishing this integration across communities spreading
out though nation in order to make them contribute to national development
efforts.

Rural development issue has become a reality especially in the last 15-20 years
through globalized approaches and national interventions because the problems of

14
rural areas are difficult to be solved solely by local people (Gülçubuk, 2005). It
has emerged as the ‘consequences of globalized economies and international
treaties that caused changes on conventional agricultural production system’ and
the new system, named as post–productivist agricultural system which is focused
on solving the problems of rural areas and makes the system sustainable by
evaluating the area’s own properties by an integrated approach encompassing
environmental, economic and social dimensions.

The simplest explanation of rural development concept should be that, it is the

intervention process of governments with the aim of making the life conditions of
rural regions better by several politics. As a general knowledge, life conditions of
humanity develop and go on through the economic, socio-cultural and
environmental factors of sustainability. Accordingly, new rural development
approach has been developed under the basics of general sustainable development
principles.

Rural development consists of a wide variety of new activities such as the

production of high quality and region specific products, nature conservation and
landscape management, agri-tourism and the development of short supply chains
(Knickel & Renting, 2000).

These new activities in rural areas mean new income sources to local people;
therefore diversification and multi-functionality are the main components
agriculture.

Agriculture may be defined as multifunctional when it has one or several

roles or functions in addition to its primary role of producing food and fibre.
These additional functions might include agriculture’s contribution to long-
term food security, the viability of rural areas, cultural heritage, land
conservation, the maintenance of agricultural landscapes and agri-biological
diversity. Policy makers across the globe are stressing the importance of
multi-functionality as a social and economic goal, and the concept has
become one of the most critical issues surrounding agricultural products at
recent World Trade Organization negotiations (Bernardo et.al., 2004).

15
Rural development process also consists of a multi-dimensional area from the
farm level to global level. ‘Although rural development often starts in the farm or
farm household, it must also be defined at the level of region or the countryside,
that is in relation to rural life in the broadest sense, and to the other (economic)
actors operating in the countryside’ (Knickel & Renting, 2000). Thus it should be
analyzed in four levels: farm, farm household, region and global.

Table 2 shows the impacts of rural development process in the various levels. The
vitality of the relations among the levels should be explained by the vitality of the
agriculture on human life. Therefore the consequences of the economic conditions
of rural people directly relate the entire life in the world.

16
Table 2: Different levels of rural development analysis
Level Key aspects

Farm • The interrelationships between different

farming activities
• The reorganization of existing agricultural
practices in order to accommodate new
activities
• The mechanisms through which new
revenues and/or new forms of cost reduction
are realized
• The development of the multifunctional or
multi-product farms
• It is the level that most understanding the
multi-functionality

Farm Household • Strategies, patterns of resource use,

interrelations and networks can only be
adequately dealt with at farm household
level
• Reorganization of the way farming is
combined with other economic activities
• It is the level that most understanding the
pluriactivity

Region • The contribution of individual activities to

the regional economy and regional
employment
• Indirect multiplier effects
• Job creation in rural areas
• Stabilization of farming activity in the region
through pluriactivity
• Interrelations between farms and other rural
enterprises
• Markets
• Networks
• Landscape
• Multi-farm cooperation at local and regional
level
Global • Interrelations between agriculture and
society as a whole
• New needs and expectations that are
articulated towards the rural areas, for
example recreative opportunities, high nature
values or environmental services,
• Town-countryside relations,
• The influence of state interventions such as
state-financed programs for nature
conservation and landscape management
Source: Adopted from Knickel and Renting (2000)

17
Another important point for rural development concept is to understand that the
development process is not only for managing and regulating the conditions
emerging through the rural areas. It also includes the managing the needs and
expectations of urban society from rural areas. Therefore, rural development
planners of a region or country must be aware of the external factors of the
planning area as much as internal factors.

Mantino (2005) lists the underlying elements of rural development concept in

five groups that are considered the main action areas. They are as follows:

• Supporting structural change in agriculture

• Developing opportunities for income diversification for the current
rural population in other sectors
• Creating favorable conditions for internal and external investments
• Encouraging increased linkages among different sectors
• Enhancing living conditions for local populations

Rural development policies are the legislative rules and regulations that are
prepared by the related institutions for obtaining and enhancing the aim of rural
development. These policies determine the framework of the actions, the
legislative positions and rights of the related actors. So, the rural development
plans are prepared at the various administrative levels of a country through the
development programs of the governments.

This process includes several mechanisms from the legislative dimension to

implementation dimension in order to obtain the goals and objectives of the plan.
A rural development plan is prepared according to the general planning principles.
The main characteristics of planning are discussed in the third section of this
chapter.

18
The agri-tourism context of this study is the agri-tourism related to
multifunctional character of rural development concept. Multifunctional
agriculture sector consists several non-agricultural activities, which are aimed to
evaluate the farm-based products as alternative economic elements. Tourism is
one of these elements directing the sector to the rural regions with the aim of
getting rural regions more developed through meeting expectations of urban
people for the recreational opportunities in rural areas.

2.3.2. Rural Tourism

The basic approach for identifying rural tourism contains four main characteristics
(Kuntay, 2004):

• It realizes in rural areas

• It activates through the rural functions
• It develops under rural scale
• It depends on surviving of the traditional features

Although in some cases, rural tourism has remained an amateur production,

recently it has been considered as a potential tool to strengthen the development
of the rural community (Sugiarti et. al., 2003).

However, disadvantaged conditions of a rural region may be obstacles for tourism

development in such areas. Djekic & Vucic (2007) list the factors that reduce the
effectiveness of the rural tourism sector. They are as follows:

• Limited number of entrepreneurs in rural areas

• Conservative nature of investors
• Short supply of spare capital in rural areas
• Small scale and dispersed nature of the industry involving many micro
enterprises

19
 • Need for co-ordination, co-operation and partnership with government
agencies to develop a ‘destination’ as distinct from a ‘stop-off point’ for
an hour or a day
• Fragmentation in product provision and marketing efforts
• Lack of policy for the management development and marketing of rural
tourism

This list shows the necessity for planning for tourism development in rural areas
to determine the types of tourism activities taking place in rural lands in order to
ascertain the goals and objectives of the activities. Planning is a must for not only
establishing a tourism sector in a conservative manner for the environment, but
also for reducing the disadvantaged conditions of the area. Therefore, rural
tourism plans are parts of general tourism plans or rural development plans of a
country, however they need local, specific approaches according to the area’s
characteristics. In other words, rural tourism development plans should be
interpreted as not only the tool for evaluating the present valuable conditions, but
also for transforming of the disadvantaged ones towards valuable conditions.

2.4. Tourism Planning

Tourism planning system is crucial for ensuring the tourism industry that can
develop and thrive, with the aim of maximizing the valuable economic, social and
environmental benefits. In other words tourism planning is a disciplinary
regulations of the instruments that may be utilized and the opportunities,
responsibilities, respondents and timing issues. Tourism plan is also used to gain
the targeting benefits in the most sustainable manner possible.

Planning studies for developing a type of tourism in a region or area are first of all
dependent on tourism policies of the country. Tourism policy is the whole of the
precautions and interventions that are determined by the public administrative
units through the general economy politics of the country for developing and

20
canalizing the internal and external tourism activities. Tourism policies of a
country lead to benefit from the opportunities of tourism that are not only
economic but also the non-economic, which are such as cultural, social, health
and achieving these aims.
In the recent past, several tourism-planning paradigms have emerged from the
broader traditions of urban and regional planning (Timothy, 1998).

2.4.1. What is planning?

‘In the broadest definition, planning is organizing the future to achieve certain
objectives’ (Inskeep, 1991, p: 25-45). Gunn and Var, (2002, p: 3) says, ‘The
purpose of any planning is to create plans of action for a foreseeable future and
implement these actions’. In other words planning may be explained as deciding
for the future by the knowledge of past and now. Planning action includes various
aims including economic development planning, urban and regional planning,
land use planning and infrastructure planning etc.

Planning is a crucial element for long term success because not only it defines the
aims, required instruments, time, resources and costs before the realization of the
phenomenon but also foresees the required controls and provides the opportunities
for revising (Gürsoy, 2006) Generally, planning ‘is a continuous process and must
be flexible, depending on changing circumstances, but it should still achieve the
basic development objectives’ (Inskeep, 1991, p: 25-45).

Planning process has three main stages consisting of preparation, implementation

and monitoring and evaluation of the results. Inskeep (1991, p: 25-45) categorizes
the success steps of a planning process that are valid for all planning activities at
every level, in a broader way as follows:

• Study preparation: writing of the study project terms of reference, and

organization of the project

21
 • Determination of development goals and objectives: Desired and foreseen
results of the study
• Surveys: Collecting data about the research area’s characteristics
• Analysis and synthesis: Analysis of the collecting
• Plan formulation: Formulation of the policies and physical plan, typically
based on preparation and evolution of alternative policies and plans
• Recommendations: Formulation of the recommendations on plan-related
project elements
• Implementation: Implementation of the plan by utilizing the techniques
that have been identified in the plan
• Monitoring: Monitoring and feedback process of implementing process
and results of the plans

2.4.2. Tourism Planning Concepts

‘In the context of history, the planning of tourism development is relatively
recent. Although a few geographers had written about tourism planning in the
1940s, the first major works appeared in the 1970s’(Gunn and Var, 2002, p: 7).
Inskeep (1991, p: 29) presents the practical application approaches for tourism
planning in eight groups as continuous, incremental and flexible approach,
systems approach, comprehensive approach, integrated approach, environmental
and sustainable approach, community approach, implementable approach and
application of a systematic planning process.

Timothy (1998) classifies tourism planning paradigms in a more general three

main groups as community-based planning, incremental planning, and
comprehensive approach.

Timothy (1998) explains the community-based tourism planning approach as

‘locally defined goals and local development actions are an integral part of
tourism planning which allows for high predictability and flexibility’ Inskeep

22
(1991, p: 29) explains the approach by maximum involvement of the local
community in the planning process and its socioeconomic benefits. Timothy
(1998) explains the incremental planning as where all stakeholders are permitted
and encouraged to participate in the decision making process and Inskeep (1991,
p: 29) says although still based on an adopted policy and plan, incremental,
continuous and flexible approach sees the tourism planning is as a ‘continuous
process with adjustments made as needed based on monitoring and feedback, but
within the framework of maintaining the basic objectives and policies of tourism
development’.

Timothy (1998) relates the comprehensive tourism development to systems

approach and says comprehensive approach is ‘another view of tourism planning
that takes on a systems tradition in that all aspects of regional tourism, including
its institutional elements, facilities and services, are planned in a comprehensive
manner’.

Systems approach is viewed the tourism development as an interrelated system.

‘Related to the systems and comprehensive approach, tourism is planned and
developed through as an integrated system within itself and also is integrated into
the overall plan and total development patterns of the area’ (Inskeep, 1991, p: 29)

The benefits of tourism planning for a country (Gürsoy, 2006):

• By the tourism plans, precautions and tools that are deemed necessary for
tourism development are identified through the identification of future
objectives
• Tourism plans provide a disciplinary order for the achievement of the
objectives
• Tourism plans provide assurance for the financial resources and
opportunities that the activity requires

23
 • Tourism plans provide the dispersion of the responsibilities and the control
on implications

2.5. Agri-tourism as a Planning Element

Agri-tourism plans are the parts of a general rural region development plans and
planning study is the duty of the official administrative units which have the
responsibility of rural development or tourism development. It should be a
national or regional administrative unit but it may be a tourism or agriculture
administration institution according to the role of the agri-tourism development of
the national aim. Agri-tourism should be developed with the aim of enhancing
agricultural production or tourism development; therefore agriculture and the
tourism ministries are the primary responsible institutions for agri-tourism
planning. Especially in developing countries, ‘it is necessary the national
intervention for development in any kind of tourism’. Whether agricultural or
tourism ministry manages the process, coordination among the all administrative
units, also forestry and environment ministries take role in the process, is the
must.

2.5.1. Development of Agri-tourism

The successful practices of agri-tourism are seen in the countries that not only the
countries, which their economies are based on agriculture and developing
countries but also, developed countries.

It started to develop as a planning element especially in the last two decades

through the raising on the agri-tourism demands as a new profile of tourist
activity making it diverse from the other types of rural tourism. First of all
discussion about the notion focuses on the definition of the term because it has
different definitions and meanings in the academic literature and in the
institutional contexts in the world.

24
It may be say that; the confusion about what agri-tourism is going on parallel with
the confusion about the concept of rural tourism. Essentially, rural tourism
contains agri-tourism. The indicative distinction between these two terms is the
implementation areas. While rural tourism enterprises take place generally on
rural lands; agri-tourism activities take place on agricultural lands. However, ‘not
all tourism which take place in rural areas is definitely rural, it can be urban in
form, and merely be located in a rural area’ (Ivona, 2003).
Another distinction between the terms is the tourism products. Agri-tourism
product is agricultural; however other forms of rural tourism products are not.
Understanding rural tourism as a general name of tourism form taking place in
rural areas in a conservative manner presents the distinction between the terms.

2.5.2. Definitions and Approaches for Agri-tourism

First of all, it is essential to explain about the confusion on the usage of the
several terms, which are taking place in the literature for describing the notion,
before examining, the various definitions of agri-tourism. In the literature, there
are several terms utilizing for each other instead of agri-tourism. The terms agri-
tourism/ agritourism, agro-tourism/agrotourism, farm-based tourism, tourism on
the farm, farm tourism, and agriteinment/ agri-teinment are the terms causing to
the confusion. There is not a generally accepted one, every country or writer take
over one of these terms according his or her approaches for the notion.

Examining literature presents the result that, the terms of farm tourism and agri-
tourism often utilized in Western Europe. Agro-tourism/agrotourism is generally
the usage of Eastern Europe like Greece, Italy and Turkey. Another usage,
agriteinment is a term of combining agriculture and entertainment and it is used in
United States of America (USA) with a distinctive meaning with agri-tourism.

In American literature there is a distinction between the terms agri-tourism and

agritainment in other words entertainment farming. Wolfe and Holland (2002)

25
explains this distinction: ‘Agri-tourism customers tend to be thought of as out-of-
town tourists, while entertainment farming activities often target local customers
(school tours, youth groups, senior citizen clubs, etc.)’.

Clarke (1996) makes another distinction between tourism on farm and farm
tourism; also some writers highlight this distinction. He relates the development
of these terms with the focus of the researches. He says, the early researches
focusing on the farm operations were evaluating the subject in a wide perspective
and it reasoned the birth of the term tourism on farms. Then, the term farm
tourism occurred according to Clarke (1996) the enlargement of research area
according to the raise in the sector and focusing on the consumer, lead to usage of
the term. In this study, the term agri-tourism is used because it is the most general
one and because of demonstrating the agricultural and touristic feature of the
concept.

American Farm Bureau Federation (2004) makes a definition of the concept as:

Agri-tourism refers to an enterprise at a working farm, ranch or agricultural

plant conducted for the enjoyment of visitors that generates income for the
owner. Agricultural tourism refers to the act of visiting a working farm or
any horticultural or agricultural operation for the purpose of enjoyment,
education or active involvement in the activities of the farm or operation
that also adds to economic viability of the site.

Especially, since the second half of the 1990s, numerous definitions of agri-
tourism takes place in the professional research studies as a contrast to the lack of
definition in 1980s. 1990s was the term that the sector gained the most effective
haste as the results of planning studies in the world. Therefore, as a consequence
of raise in the research areas, definitions of the term varied and developed.

Another reason of this plethora is the complex structure of the concept that
combines the agriculture and tourism principles. The researchers studying on
tourism makes definitions reflecting the tourism dimension of the notion. There

26
are several studies examining agri-tourism as a sub-sector of rural tourism or
ecotourism. These studies evaluate agri-tourism according to the sustainable
tourism principles and cooperative tourism principles. However, writers studying
on the agricultural dimension of agri-tourism examine the relationship of food
production, sustainable agriculture, diversification on agri- cultural products etc.
A review of existing literature shows that there is no general definition or concept
of agri-tourism. As well as academic studies identify various definitions, the
national and regional laws of the countries make the definition of the sector with
the drawing bordures and/or acceptations.
In this study, it is aimed to introduce agri-tourism as a planning element acting as
rural development instrument. Also it is accepted as the sub-sector of rural
tourism having its own dynamics operating distinctively from rural tourism. With
its two dimensional structure, it combines the various principles of sustainable
tourism and sustainable agriculture.

Sustainable Tourism

Sustainable Rural
Development Agri-tourism

Sustainable
Agriculture

Figure 1: Two components of sustainable rural development constitute agri-

tourism

Nowadays, there are various definitions in the governments’ rural development

programs by the reasons of verified approaches to this agricultural and touristic
activity. One of these approaches, a sustainable way of economic survival in

27
agricultural regions, is the mostly accepted one in the literature. It is the approach
of integration among sustainable development, sustainable tourism and
sustainable agriculture principals. Rural tourism should be seen as a potential
tool for conservation and sustainability, rather than as an urbanizing and
development tool (Ivona, 2003).

Sustainability as one of the main components of the rural development concept

introduces the main elements of agri-tourism concept. Although tourism demand,
the desire for benefiting from tourism activities, is raising in rural regions and this
raising makes the economic sector pleased, several deterioration on the tourism
resources and tourism products make the governments to create strategies for
utilizing the tourism resources -natural and cultural- in a conservative manner for
the sector’s future.

Especially 1990s were the years of emerging sustainable policies and practices for
economic growth and sustainable tourism approach as a result of Rio Conference
in 1992. ‘Sustainable development, sustainability, environmental sustainability,
sustainable growth are often used inter- changeably, and their specific
connotations are then often confused and misunderstood’ (Droy, 2003).
Sustainable development approach targets the development programs of the
countries and leads them using the present resources of the world in a sustainable
manner that makes the resources also usable for the future generations.

Another misunderstanding and confusing point about the term is the sustainable
tourism. It is generally premised that sustainable tourism is only related with the
alternative types of tourism, which are realizing on the natural or nature-based
areas. Therefore, it is important to understand that any type of tourism may be
sustainable if it is planned and practiced according to the sustainable growth
principles. Also it is important to understand, sustainable tourism is not a type of
tourism, it is a tourism development approach taking its basis from the
environmental conservation and sustainable development.

28
Inskeep, (1991, p: 29) explains sustainable tourism as, ‘The focus of the
sustainability debate is that tourism must be planned and managed in such a
manner that its natural and cultural resources are not depleted or degraded, but
maintained as viable resources on a permanent basis for continuous future use’.
Lane, (1994) identifies four necessary features for the sustainable rural tourism
strategies as:

• It is important that the person or team formulating the strategy is skilled

not only in tourism development but also in economic, ecological and
social analysis
• Wide consultations amongst all interest groups are essential. These
consultations will include trade and business, transport, farmers,
administrators, and the custodians of the natural and historic assets of the
area
• Tourism relies more than any other industry on local goodwill. The local
population must be happy with their visitors and the secure in the
knowledge that the visitor influx will not overwhelm their live, increase
their income hosts and impose new and unwelcome value systems on them
• The strategy-making process should not be a once-only affair. It has to be
an evolving long-term enterprise, able to cope with change, and able to
admit to its own mistakes and shortcomings. It is the beginning of a
partnership between business, government and cultural and conservation
interests

Understanding the planning principles of sustainable tourism is important for

understanding the emerging points of agri-tourism plans. Because it is a form of
sustainable rural tourism; a successful agri-tourism plan have to include the
principles of sustainable tourism and ‘the concept of sustainability in rural tourism
must be a multi-purpose one if it is to succeed’ (Lane, 1994). Lane (1994) also
lists these aims for the sustainability in rural tourism as:

29
 • Sustaining the culture and character of host communities
• Sustain landscape and habitats
• Sustaining the rural economy
• Sustaining a tourism industry which will be viable in the long term-and
this in turn means the promotion of successful and satisfying holiday
experiences
• Develop sufficient understanding, leadership and vision amongst the
decision-makers in an area that they realize the dangers of too much
reliance on tourism, and continue to work towards a balanced and
diversified rural economy

Carrying capacity analysis is the key instrument of sustainable tourism. It is ‘one

of the most complex and confusing concepts, which faces the geographer in
seeking to understand recreation sites and their ability to support a certain level of
usage’ (Hall &Page, 2002, p: 134). Four types of recreational carrying capacity
(Hall &Page, 2002, p: 134):

• Physical carrying capacity: Primarily concerned with quantitative

measures of the number of people or usage a site can support, primarily
being a design concept
• Economic carrying capacity: Primarily concerned with multiple use of
resources, particularly its compatibility with the site and wider
management objectives for the site
• Ecological carrying capacity: Primarily concerned with the maximum
level of recreational use, in terms of numbers and activities, that can be
accommodated by an area or ecosystem before an unacceptable or
irreversible decline in ecological values occur
• Social carrying capacity: Often referred to as perceptual, psychological or
behavioral capacity. The basic principles of this approach relate to the
ability of individuals and groups to tolerate others, their activities and the
level of acceptability

30
Ecotourism is the one, which is usually used instead of agri-tourism. The term
was called for the first time in the late with the effects of the pursuit for
developing sustainable tourism forms (Kahraman & Türkay, 2004, p: 85)
Drawing definitive bordures between these tourism types is difficult and still has
lack of identification. The definite distinction between the terms is that eco-
tourism is a general identification of some types of tourisms with the
responsibility of ethical procedures on conserving the nature. Through the
reference of this acceptation, ‘agri-tourism can be viewed much like eco-tourism
in that it is small-scale, low impact, and in most cases, education-focused’
(Blacka et. al., 2001).

Holdnak (2000) says, ‘According to environmentalists, ecological tourism is a

measure of the amount of renewable resources in the environment in units of the
number of organisms these resources can support. Thus, the volume of people is
related to the limitations of a fragile and delicate environment’. He also identifies
the aesthetic carrying capacity sustainable ecological tourism and defines the
term as: ‘People’s space in relation to one another. It suggests that when tourists
encounter many other tourists or see the impacts of other visitors their enjoyment
may be diminished’.

Essentially, it is appropriate to say that ecotourism activities take place on the

nature-based or rural areas and aims less destruction on the natural or human-
made/cultural resources because of the tourism activities while utilizing them
through the tourism demands. As it is explained above, sustainable tourism works
for sustainable development and it aims to sustain tourism resources not only in
environmental but also in economic and social approach.

2.5.3.Agri-tourism and planning

Agri-tourism concept dates back to vacation on farm and countryside tradition,
such as visiting relatives or buying some rural products such as foods or

31
traditional goods. Holdnak (2000) says about the first vacationing on farms was
operated in North Dakota in 1880s and according to the same article the first farm
vacation brochure listed the farm facilities for the tourists in 1949. He indicates
the effects of preparing the list of farms serving vacation facilities on the numbers
of agro-tourists.

In Europe, ‘rural tourism first developed in France in 1951’ (Dettori et. al., 2004).
A survey study in France in 1992 indicates ‘the French farmers declared that rural
tourism is acquiring an increasing role and economic impact within their
agriculture activity’ and also ‘from the analysis, it also emerged that rural tourism
mainly practiced by female operators’ (Dettori et. al., 2004). It is known that in
1994, there were 21 000 farms with 109 000 bedrooms serving accommodation
facilities providing benefits to farmers and regional economies by the rents of the
rooms, selling agricultural products in Austria (Kahraman & Türkay, 2004, p:38)

Although agri-tourism was firstly emerged as individual enterprises, it developed

as a sub-sector of tourism sector in cooperative manner by the effects of well-
planned processes.

It should be possible to evaluate the development processes of agri-tourism in two

categories as the period of farmers tried to benefit from the people’s tendency of
spending holidays in rural areas and this tendency lead to development of the
sector and the period of making these enterprises organized according to the aims,
expectations and plans of the governments through the aim of providing a new
tourism sub-sector.

Today, agri-tourism is benefited as an element of regional development programs

and it acts as rural development instrument in the regions which economy is based
on agriculture and has potential for tourism development.

32
Successful examples show that an agri-tourism plan requires some main features
for achieving the objectives:

• Aim of the project: It is important to determine the aims and objectives of

the project for making clear the development way for all the stakeholders
of the project and so the future of the project
• Agri-tourism product as the regional/areal product: It is seen that the
mostly famous agri-tourism areas are well known through their agri-
tourism products. Agri-tourism product may be an agricultural product or
the facility that is presenting in the area. Generally, grapes and wine, olive
and olive oil products or the organic products are the most-interested agri-
tourism products and they are presenting as the regional image elements.
Moreover, accommodation facilities in the historical buildings is another
agri-tourism product attracts the agri-tourists.
• Agri-tourism development area: Agri-tourism is generally encouraged to
develop in unproductive and disadvantageous agricultural areas. Thus, it is
aiming to sustain agricultural lands through providing economic and social
opportunities for the farmers living in this area.
• Disadvantages of Agri-tourism: However, disadvantages of agri-tourism
operation have to be considered such as competing with the main farm
operations for time and labour. Also some responsibilities, financial risks
and the high liability risk may be occured
• Targeting groups: It is important to identify the target groups of the agri-
tourism development area: Agri-tourists and agri-tourism products have to
be appropriate. Also the tourists have to be appropriate for the traditional
life styles of local people. Potential target groups should be school groups,
youth groups, adult civic groups, families with children, business
travelers, travel and tour firms, landscape and wildlife photographers,
hunters, fair and festival goers, outdoor enthusiasts such as bikers, boaters,
rafters

33
Agri-touristic demands and the characteristics of agri-tourists are one of the
determiners of the basic features of the agri-tourism plans. Analyzing where
tourists come from, the reasons of preference of agri-tourism, what they prefer to
spend their money for and the characteristics of agri-tourists are one of the
primary analysis studies of planning process and lead to the clarity of the aims
and tourism supply.

Agri-tourist desires to learn about farm life but as all tourists wants to have
confidence, comfort and looks for hygiene rules, desires to taste or buy high-
quality local products (especially food), has emphasize on environmental
protection. A survey study done in Kansas State shows the American agri-tourist
behaviors effects on planning of agri-tourism because the farms located close to
population centers clearly have a location advantage and tourists are more likely
to travel to a destination if there are several tourist stops to visit (Bernardo et. al.,
2004).

Agri-tourism supply varies according to the policies, touristic demand, the

features of the geography that the tourism activity takes place in and the creativity
of the farm operator. In the base of the tourism product there is agricultural
production and traditional life style (food, health, handicrafts, house holdings and
house keeping). Blacka et. al.(2001), categorizes the agri-tourism activities in
USA into six groups:

1. Overnight stays:
• Lodging and camping
• Bed and breakfast
• Camp sites
• Youth camp
• Farm stays, feeding animals, picking fruit/vegetables
• Rental cabin for day trips / picnics
• Weddings, receptions, honeymoons

34
2. Special events and festivals
• Music festivals
• Harves festival

3. Off the farm

• Farmer’s market
• Fairs
• Roadside stands

4. Recreation activities and events

• Fee fishing
• Biking
• Corn maze
• Horseback riding
• Bird watching
• Hiking
• Rock climbing

5. Fresh products and value-added products: Tourism enhanced direct

marketing
• Pick your own fruits/vegetables
• Selling canned foods on farm
• Selling herbal/organic products

6. Youth and/or adult education

• Organized tours
• Agricultural education programs
• Nature education programs
• Demonstrations such as wine making, honey making or heritage
crafts

35
Examples above are given to demonstrate the attractions for enterprises and the
dimensions of the implementation areas. Diversifying these agri-tourism products
are depending on the resources of the farm and region.

In recent past, several tourism-planning paradigms have emerged from the

broader traditions of urban and regional planning (Timothy, 1998).

Inskeep (1991) categorizes tourism planning approaches in eight groups as

continuous, incremental, and flexible approach, systems approach, comprehensive
approach, integrated approach, environmental and sustainable development
approach, community approach, and implemental approach. In these approaches
agri-tourism provides the principles of community approach with its feature of
‘maximum involvement of the local community in the planning and decision-
making process of tourism’.

Agri-tourism is evaluated as one of the main elements of regional tourism plans.

However, besides being an element of regional tourism plans, agri-tourism has
mechanisms to make develop and manage the activity. Agricultural tourism plans
develop according to the cooperative tourism approach and a cooperative tourism
approach requires cooperation between various planning units. Timothy (1998)
examines these required cooperative relations of tourism development process,
‘Cooperation between government agencies, between different levels of
government, between equally autonomous polities at various administrative
levels, and between the private and public sector is necessary if integrative
tourism development is the goal’.
So, agri-tourism is an element of tourism planning with its integrative and
cooperative manner. Establishing a powerful agri-tourism sector in the regional
scale depends on establishing a good coordination of relations in a well-developed
tourism plan. The coordination of relations may be described as the roles of the
administrative units of a country.

36
 Cooperative Tourism Planning

Cooperation Cooperation Cooperation Private and

between between between same public
government levels of level polities sector
agencies administratio sector

Figure 2: Four types of cooperation necessary for the development of successful

integrative tourism,
Source: Scheme is taken from Timothy, (1998)

Reviewing the examples from the developed countries demonstrate that, the
successful agricultural tourism practices involve cooperative action in all
government levels. Another knowledge indicates that, local initiatives and non-
governmental organizations take role on each level of agri-tourism planning
process.

Each country has its own administrative structure and national administrations
with the specific roles, in other words responsibilities operating for the
requirements for the tourism development processes. Because agricultural tourism
is a multi-sector approach (tourism and agriculture), it also requires cooperation
between two or more same level administrations. Therefore it is important to
evaluate the benefits and needs of these administrative units, such as polities and
fiscal regulations.

Several case studies show that, level of national government is a determinative

element in community-based tourism development. Because it is crucial
participating into decision-making areas, it may be say that lower level of

37
administrations has more advantage to establish community-based tourism, such
as agri-tourism with the positive impacts of local participation and cooperation.

In the countries with the higher level of governance, for instance Poland, it is the
national government deciding, planning, encouraging, and monitoring the
processes. Because undertaking most of the roles, which are the components of
the agri-tourism development process, some disadvantages may effect on the agri-
tourism development process, e.g. legal procedures may cause to lack of time or it
may cause to lack of reflecting the local conditions and tendencies. Timothy,
(1998), also underlines the requirement of ‘To be successful, tourism
development in a region might require coordinated efforts between two or more
levels of government’. Existence of two or more levels of government in the
planning studies should help to represent the necessities of the levels.

However, in the countries with lower-level governance, in other words

administrative decentralization, e.g. Italy, national government determines the
national benefits and national approaches and exposes the targeting aims with
agri-touristic activities for whole country. Planning the agri-tourism development
process is the responsibility of the regional and local administrative forces. This
kind of governmental structure provides participation of desires and necessities of
local entrepreneurs, NGOs and private sector; so makes actual local conditions
taking place in the plans. It also helps contributing to establish satisfaction among
local people.

Cooperation among the farmers has another key role for agri-tourism
development because of the positive effects of cooperation between the same
benefit groups not only on developing conscious of the local community but also
integrating the powers for providing common benefits in a competition area.

So, establishment of agri-tourism sector requires a cooperative structure because

of the organized relations of the several administrative and operational units.

38
2.5.4. Agricultural dimension of agri-tourism
The post-productivist agricultural system takes place in the center of the agri-
tourism industry. Centralized state intervention, agricultural co-operatives and
national farmers’ organizations –its pillars- have lost their capacity to regulate the
agro-food system and respond to emerging problems of farmers, consumers and
citizens (Brunori & Rossi, 2000). According to Ilbery et. al. (1998), ‘post-
productivist system is the world’s new food regime which acts as globally and
accepts new agricultural policies to implement’.

Productivist system is the known as conventional farming, which was emerged

after World War II, by the effects of industrialization. It was the transition from
‘farming as a family business to farming as a sector of an integrated agro-food
industry has come to be called productivist agriculture’ (Lowe et. al., 1993). It
was the system of ‘overriding priority on the production of food’ (Trauger, 2001),
supporting by governments by several subsidies.

There is a realization of a globally effected transition in the world as the

consequences of international policies and consensus on new system of world’s
food production, therefore, international regulations determine the roles of
countries and policies that they have to implement.

Through the new agricultural production model that is called as post-productivist

system, governments aim to provide a multifunctional character to agriculture;
aim to make rural territories become multifunctional on the other side of agri-
cultural production.

The post- productivity system introduces advantages for:

• Qualitative priorities in food production

• Alternative income sources for farmers
• Sustainability of agricultural lands

39
 • Conservation of environment
• New employment opportunities

It is the new, integrated and territorial rural development concept that one of the
main targets of the post-productivity system. In this framework, agri-tourism
raised as a planning element in the less-advantageous rural regions such as:

• Marginal lands
• Peripheral, mountainous areas
• Presence of unemployment
• Presence of tourism opportunities; landscape, cultural heritage,
specialized food production and traditional food production skills
• The rural areas, which are closer to urban areas because distance of the
area to urban settlements is an important criteria for determining the
type of agri-touristic enterprises.

2.5.5. Agri-tourism as an economic development instrument

It has developed as an economic opportunity for farmers for:
• New marketing opportunities
• Adding value to agricultural production
• Diversifying and bolstering income sources

Ilbery et. al. (1998) submits farm-based tourism as an alternative farm enterprise
of multifunctional agriculture. They describe an alternative farm enterprise as ‘a
new (innovative) on-farm enterprise that involves the conversion, diversification
or extensification of the farm business’. Accordingly describe the economic
dimension of farm-based tourism by pluriactivity and diversification of farm
business development.

40
Ilbery et. al. (1998) described pluriactivity as ‘redeployment of farm resources
into new non-agricultural products’. Diversification of farm enterprises is related
to performance of the farm’s production, farm’s resources and the enthusiasm and
skills of the farmers about innovation.

2.5.6. Socio-cultural dimension of agri-tourism

Social and cultural effects of tourism effect on the individual behaviors, family
relations, life styles, customs and traditions of the community system and this
socially. A transformation effected on one element cause another transformations
on the other elements of the system in the course of time.

To achieve the main aim of a country that developing the natural and economic
resources and evaluating them for the people benefits could be realize through the
human resources that have the required capabilities.

Multi-dimensional feature of agri-tourism also presents transformation

possibilities on the socio-cultural dimension of rural region people. The changing
conditions have socio-cultural impacts on the communities not only on rural
people but also on urban people. These impacts:

• Education activities that are the requirements of the agri-tourism

development process, provide new skills and conception of the world to
rural people
• Agri-tourism plays a connective role between rural and urban people.
Through this way rural people should have opportunities for having closer
relations with urban life and urban people should have deeper knowledge
about the rural parts of the world. This should effect on developing the
communication between urban and rural people.

41
 • Agri-tourism should provide new employment opportunities especially for
young generation; it plays an effective role for decreasing the migration
numbers.

2.5.7. Educational dimension of agri-tourism

Agri-tourism is also an educational instrument for farmers and consumers. In the
farmer side, partners of a project such as universities, institutes and experts and
others organize education facilities for farmers to provide new skills on
agricultural techniques, tourism administrations, tourism services, language skills.
On the other side, educational programs prepared for tourists by these units or
farmers develop the awareness and knowledge of people about nature.

Education acts as one of the sustainable way for the future of rural life. Especially
in America, operating daily educational tours for the school groups are well-
developed activities for improving the awareness of children about nature and
rural life conditions.

Veeck et. al. (2006), defines agri-tourism as ‘Defining agricultural tourism is

something akin to the blind men and elephant, but there is general agreement that
agri-tourism incorporates visit the farms for the purpose of on-site retail
purchases, enjoyment, and education (cooking classes, flower classes, farm
history)’.

In their study, Sherer et. al.(2005) indicates Pomerania Region, one of the
European regions famous with the agri-tourism activities as ‘one of the great
potential incomes for farmers’ and they emphasize ‘the need for qualified
services in the areas for education about the environment and nutrition, especially
for children and young people who are increasingly unawareness of the
environment and nature and lack knowledge about the origins and production of
food in the region’.

42
2.5.8. Agri-tourism as a gender approach
Agri-tourism differs from other types of tourism with its family labored
characteristic. There are studies for researching on the women’s role on agri-
touristic activities and a gender approach was developed according to the roles of
women in agri-tourism enterprises.

According to the data of (DIE,2003); in 2003, the general ratio of paticipation to

the labourforce is 48.3% in Turkey. And while 70.4% constitutes by the men,
26.6% of this ratio is the women laborforce. While women participation to the
labourforce in urban areas has the ratio of 18.5%; in the rural areas ratio increases
to 39%. Data demonstrates that in Turkey, the number women participating to the
labourforce in rural ares is more than urban areas. However, this women are the
workers of their family works with no income and assurance. However, in Turkey
migration from rural areas to the urban areas generally causes not participating to
the laborforce of migrating women in urban areas.

However, when the women-men work participation is evaluated according to the

regional properties in Turkey, it is accepted that in the Anatolian regions, 50%-
80% types of rural works are achieved by rural women (Arat,1986).

Agri-tourism is a new work area for farmhouseholds and it is seen that women are
the main operator of the facilities because of their role in the family life. In fact,
generally it tends to establish by rural women because of the dominant feature of
agri-tourism that is adoptable for the rural women’s life style.
Greece is one of the countries where the agri-touristic activities generally
operating by women. At the international level, connections between women lead
to agri-tourism development as a women activity, as in the Karaburun Women
Agri-tourism Project example, which is the consequence of the relations between
Turkish and Greece rural women.

43
Therefore, agri-tourism planning issue directly relates the women problematic of
rural development issue. Development of the sector also includes the socially,
culturally and economic development of the women.

2.6. Conclusion
In this chapter, agri-tourism is evaluated through its main characteristics, which
are appropriate for three main characteristics (social, economic, environmental) of
rural and sustainable tourism development issue. Also it is reviewed as being a
planning element.

Whether it is a tourism or agriculture activity, there is an increasing tendency for

developing agri-tourism sector parallel with increasing necessities of protecting
the agricultural lands of the world and as well as being a nature-based recreational
activity with its tourism benefits, it is also gaining more emphasize with its
structure serving for agricultural production and its aspects promoting the rural
products of a country.

Because of its multifunctional, cooperative development aspect, agri-tourism

planning activities are in need for various relations of planning mechanisms that
are examined in the second chapter.

44
 CHAPTER 3

AGRI-TOURISM IN EUROPE: TWO CASES

3.1. Introduction
Not only in Europe, almost in all developed countries of the world, rural solutions
are produced to solve the problems through the local potentials of the area or
region. In the recent approaches of rural development issue, traditions and
products are served as the consumption goods, therefore policies developed with
the aim of making rurality not only more valuable but also sustainable tool for
rural development in Europe.

In Europe with the aim of emphasizing the integrative role and socio-economic
importance of tourism, the year 1990 has declared as European Tourism Year and
at the late 1990s tourism policies gained the feature of being employment policies

As the consequence, Europe has noticed and accepted the supplementary role of
rural tourism on decreasing the regional inequalities and increasing the
employment. The development process of rural tourism in Europe developed in a
parallel way to the development process of rural development approach.

3.2. An Overview for Rural Development Policies in Europe

Rural development approach was firstly mentioned in the Mansholt Plan in 1968
because of the raise in the inadequacies and inequalities in the EU’s rural areas.
Plan was presenting measures for the future of rural areas by the way of
modernizing farm businesses, decreasing farm population and early retirement for
farmers.

45
From 1968 to today’s rural development approaches, approaches have been
transformed and developed according to the sustainability concept in the world
and these new type of rural development policies lead to various success stories of
economic growth in various regions of Europe. Nowadays, it aims to integrate the
social and economic conditions of rural and urban regions and improving national
economic performance, while conserving the important aspects of the rural
heritage and solving the problems in its own districts of the region by its various
potentials for development not only in economic standards but also social and
environmental ones.

In Europe, the period of between World War II and 1980s were the times for
agricultural policies that had the base of ‘cheap food’ through the financial
supports, which were improving by the governments. Their aims were satisfying
the agricultural community financially and preventing the migration.

However, 1980s were the years of vital transformations in the world. International
agreements on agricultural policies expose new requirements for the future of the
Common Agricultural Policies (CAP). These years were the years of economic,
social and environmental constraints with the inequalities among rural regions,
existence of skills for competition in the countries, which the economies is based
on agriculture and increase on migration, also with the enlargement process.
Therefore, new approaches developed those aim to satisfy all the sectors, which
effected by the conditions, and in particular provide supportive mechanisms for
the disadvantaged regions to guarantee fair competition.

At the same time, it was the period that the international agricultural agreements
caused decreasing of the agricultural subsidies. These internationational
developments leaded to implementing new financial support programs in the
course of time through the reforming in CAP in EU.

The reforming process in CAP prepared the adaptable bases for rural development
policies. Agricultural policies and rural development policies include the same

46
development area according to the EU approach. This development process has
some important milestones for the development of the European Rural
Development Program (ERDP) approach. It gives clarity to evaluate the ERDP
according to the most important dates of the process. Process may be examined
through five main stages:

1. 1968- Mansholt Plan

2. 1980-Southern Enlargement & Territorial Approach
3. 1987/1988-Reforms in Structural Funds / Future of Rural Areas
4. 1996-European Conference on Rural Development / Cork Declaration
5. 2000-Agenda 2000

3.2.1. 1968- Mansholt Plan

It was the plan that was prepared in the productivist term, which was evaluating
the rural development issue through agricultural manner. The focus of the new
regulations of the plan was about the farmers’ skills and rural lands’ development.
The importance of the plan is being the first approach to rural problems in a
modernized approach. Then, 1970s were the years that under the effects of the
Mansholt Plan.

3.2.2. 1980- Southern Enlargement & Territorial Approach

The year 1980 is the main important milestone for today’s ERDP. The main effect
on the reform was the Southern Enlargement of EU because of the participation of
Greece in 1981 and then Spain and Portugal in 1986. The enlargement lead to
significant problems on CAP because of the economic structure of these countries
depended on agriculture. National and regional inequalities and differences on the
economic structure lead to a crisis in EU, therefore, these conditions caused to the
new transformations in CAP, which should explain as Sectoral / Productivist

47
Approach to Territorial & Integrated Approach. So, as a consequence, 1980 may
be evaluated the year of determining the basic feature of the today’s ERDP.

3.2.3. 1987-1988 Period of Reforms in Structural Funds

In 1987, five main objectives for the dissociation of the structural funds were
determined to improve the effectiveness of structural funds. Structural funds are
summarized to make understand the diversification in financial support
mechanisms, which are working for different problems taking place in
disadvantaged rural regions.

Objective 1 Regions are the most important ones with the aim to promote
development and adjustment of regions, which are lagging behind economically.
Objective 2 Regions include areas undergoing industrial conversion, whose
percentage share of industrial employment and average rate of unemployment
both exceed the EU average. Objective 3 Regions are the regions that have long-
term unemployment problems. Objective 4 Regions deals with vocational training
for young people. Objective 5a and 5b Regions are the regions, which need
economic diversification and which are dependent on extremely vulnerable
agricultural activities.

In 1988, the structural funds reformed and expanded to provide a greater share of
the funds for the less developed regions with the aim of achieving economic and
social cohesion between different Member States. 1988 was the year of The
Future of Rural Society because of the reforming in CAP and the considerations
of the requirement for a European policy about rural development issue.

1. European Regional Development Funds (ERDF): Finance major

infrastructure projects such as roads and ports.
2. European Social Funds (ESF): This fund is set up to reduce differences in
prosperity and living standards across EU Member States and regions, and

48
 therefore promoting economic and social cohesion.
(http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/esf/discover/esf_en.htm)
3. European Agricultural Guidance And Guarantee Fund (EAGGF): Designed
to help the agricultural and farming sector :It has two sections that includes
guarantee and guidance sections. Fund supports and finances the Objective 1,
the less developed areas, Objective 5a, agriculture and forestry and objective
5b-economic diversity opportunities.

3.2.4. 1991- LEADER Initiative (Links Between Actions for the Development
of Rural Economy Initiative)
This initiative can be evaluated as the most important step for the European rural
development program, with its aim of providing support for bottom to up projects
in the depressed rural regions. Meanwhile, LEADER Initiative developed in three
periods that are the LEADER I Period between 1991-1994, the LEADER II
Period between 1994-1999, and the third period starting with Agenda 2000, which
is named LEADER+ Initiative.

‘LEADER I marked the start of a new approach to rural development policy

which is territorially based, integrated and participative and LEADER II saw
LEADER I approach put to more wide-spread use, with emphasis on the
innovative aspect of projects (http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rur/leaderplus/intro_
en.htm).

LEADER Program supports rural communities to improve the quality of their

lives and economic prosperity in their local areas. It is a public-private partnership
organization and local action groups (LAG) should implement the local programs
by the funds provided by Guidance Section Program has 4 main principles:

1. Bottom to up and integrated rural development programs

2. A territorial approach

49
3. Program finances by the European Commission (EC) and member states

3.2.5. The period of 1990-1997

MacSharry Reforms should be accepted as most effective formation of this period
and through these new regulations. After these reforms EU gave priority to land
use and equality issues of development in the rural regions and obligation for the
member states for environment protection and forestry.

3.2.6. 1996- Cork Conference

European Conference on Rural Development in Cork, Ireland, raising the public
awareness about rural development and making rural areas more attractive to live
and to work in and promoting rural development in an international context were
the emphasizing points of the conference. At the end of the conference,
commission was published a declaration with ten points that calls for integrated
approach, sustainability, subsidiary, management, coordinating the rural
development programs and diversification.

European Conference on Rural Development held in Cork, has considered

that agricultural development, economic diversification, natural resources
management, culture tourism, recreational activities promotion shall be all
in rural development future politics. It followed a rural development politics
inspired to sustainability principles whose aim is preserve rural landscape
quality and create necessary conditions to avoid rural exodus, valorizing
environmental resources and diversifying economic activities (Ivona, 2003).

3.2.7. 1999- Agenda 2000

These policies under Agenda 2000 reflect the multifunctional character of the EU
rural development approach. Under Agenda 2000, new reforms on agricultural
and structural policies developed and a set of measures presented for rural areas.
By this way, EU enlarged the intervention areas and types of interventions by the
new programs.

50
European rural development approach is territorial and integrated. (Knickel and
Renting, 2000) categorizes rural development through two approaches in Table3.

Table 3 exposes the vitality of the two elements, the cultural landscape and
regional identity, for agri-tourism development. In the countries that developed
agri-tourism sector in a sustainable manner, it seen that a good-working agri-
tourism plan brings up the agricultural development. It leads protecting the
agricultural lands from the usage with different purposes.

It may be said that, cultural landscapes and regional identity are the two cores of
the European rural development approach related to rural tourism development.
By this approach the region itself is the tourism product with its identity and
regional image. Therefore rural tourism is a regional marketing strategy that
supported by EU to develop in such a manner.

‘The national or regional rural development plans submitted by each country in

accordance with the Rural Development Regulation 1257/99. This regulation
that was approved in 2000, has the purpose of leading the countries to implement
measures of improvements to farm structures, agri-environmental measures and
also presents measures for encouraging the development of rural activities.

Figure 3 exposes the rural development issue according to its three elements,
which are in relation in the life cycle and demonstrates the multi-functional
characteristic of rural economy. Agri-tourism is given as one of the non-
agricultural products that are produced by agriculture producers, distinct from the
other tourism activities that take place in rural areas.

51
Table 3: Two examples of key interfaces in rural development

Rural Development Environment Agriculture Rural

Elements Development

1. Cultural landscapes Maintenance of Marketing of Regional marketing;

and regional identity natural resources agricultural products short food chains
and the diversity of with a regional from producer to
cultural landscapes image; consumer;

Processing and High quality food

marketing at regional products;
level
Development of
rural (‘green’)
tourism

2. Bio-energy Reduction of air Diversification of Development and

production pollution in agricultural diversification of
conjunction with the production into non- non-agricultural
production of energy food crops; sectors;
crops;
Product innovations; Spin-off (multiplier)
Increasing crop effects in rural
diversity New secondary business;
products and farm-
based processing ‘Seedbed capacity’
technologies of farming for new
economic activities

Source: Knickel and Renting, (2000)

52
Figure 3: Figure exposes the three dimension of rural development issue.
Source: Scheme is taken from Veer and Tuunteer, (2005)

3.3. Rural Tourism in Europe

In Europe, agri-tourism is encouraged and managed through two legislative-
regulative mechanisms of regional development plans and rural development
plans of the countries. There is not a specific legislation or regulation about rural
tourism in the legislation of EU. Each country determines its own policies
according to the principles of its own development policies, therefore ‘rural
tourism appears to be a heterogeneous activity across the EU countries’ (Dettori
et.al, 2004).

‘Tourism plays an important role in the development of the vast majority of

European regions. Infrastructure created for tourism purposes contributes to local

53
development, and jobs are created or maintained even in areas in industrial or
rural decline, or undergoing urban regeneration’ (EC, 2006).

The recognition of the main linkages those are economic, social and
environmental between tourism and sustainable development, ‘has been achieved
in 1997 by the European Conference in Luxembourg where tourism was
identified as the key to activating growth processes in rural functionality of
several economic and non-economic sectors’ (Dettori et. al., 2004)

At the European level several international institutions and associations act for
promoting and assisting the rural tourism activities. European Centre for
Ecological and Environmental Tourism (ECEAT) is one of those organizations,
which ‘is a network of over 1300 small-scale accommodations and tourist
services all over Europe, offering sustainable quality of tourist services and
approves their contribution to local communities and protection of the
environment’ (www.eceat.org).

In the WTO Seminar, ‘Rural Tourism in Europe: Experiences and Perspectives’

in 2002, consensus of the countries is grouped in the six approaches:

• Economics
• Protection on the environment
• Legal Framework
• Quality of life
• Preservation of culture
• Transition to the market economy

As the consequence of the seminar, required and useful strategies that were
suggested by the countries are grouped in four categorizes:

54
 • Organizations and Co-operation for ensuring the establishment and
management of a successful rural tourism
• Linkages and Networks is useful between rural tourism products providers
• Zonal approach that as a strategy which takes account of the natural and
cultual assets of a particular destination (Such as Area A- Farm tourism,
Area B- Mountain Activities; Area C- Vineyard Trails of a rural tourism
development region)
• Clusters for achieving viability in rural tourism are likely to be greater by
‘clustering’ rural tourism enterprises (Data is adopted from:
http://www.unwto.org/regional/europe/PDF/rural_en.pdf)

EU did not identify any specific policy for rural tourism development. Rural
tourism develops under the regional development policies that are developed at
the regional level through the EU criteria, because EU supports bottom- to-up
approaches.

At this point discussion is formed as, how do the countries develop their policies,
what are the vital indicators of the agri-tourism development process and how do
the countries make organized their administrations for developing rural tourism at
the regional and local level, how can the governments determine the lands for
rural/agri-tourism development through the zoning approach.

Another discussion is whether agri-tourism is only a tourism activity, in other

words, it is only for the economic growth of the weak regions and is agri-tourism
should be panacea for a region as marketing the region as the tourism product.

55
3.4. Agri-tourism in Poland and Italy

3.4.1. An Overview to Rural Tourism sector in Poland

Poland is one of the EU members since 1 May 2004 and it includes the 8,4% of
total population of EU with 38.2 millions of population. Poland, the ninth larger
country of EU with 312700 square kilometers, with 16 provinces (voivodships),
314 counties (poviats) and 2478 communes (gminas) is an underdeveloped
country with a dominant agriculture sector in the whole economy and
approximately, 93% of the total territory of Poland is rural (Data is taken from the
web site of Polish Ministry of Agriculture).

Veer and Tuunter, (2005) categorizes the current conditions of the Poland’s
country-side in seven groups:

• Little vitality and development

• High levels of recorded and concealed unemployment
• Low income because of the decreasing profitability of agricultural
production
• High level of dependence on social support from the government
• Negative migration (younger people, in particular, moving to cities).
• Low training levels and lack of entrepreneurial capacity
• Underdeveloped technical and social infrastructure

In Poland, agri-tourism facilities had started to take place as a rural tourism

development element in 1990s under the policies of rural tourism development
and rural tourism has been an element of the rural development program of the
Polish government and the national policy “support rural families adjusting to
change resulting from economic restructuring” (ruraltourisminternational.org).

56
The opinion of benefiting from rural tourism/ agri-tourism should developed
because of the conditions that do not allow competition economically in the new
market economy after the participation to EU.

1990s were the years of adopting the EU market economy criteria and Poland was
a weak country with its economy that is dependent on its traditionally agriculture
sector after falling down the socialist regime. EU supported Poland not only by
financial resources also lead the process of transformation on rural tourism sector
to develop as an alternative solution way for the rural families.

In Poland rural tourism organizations are supported by “two funding

organizations supporting the rural development: The Agency for Restructuring
and Modernization of Agriculture and the Foundation of Assistance - Programs
for Agriculture (ruraltourisminternational.org).

In Poland, agri-tourism and rural tourism are implemented in the mountainous

areas, at the coastal areas and in the vicinity of lakes, rivers and forests.
Malopolskie Region with 3433, Warminsko-mazurskie Region with 2500 and
Pomorskie Regions with 2392 agri-tourism and rural tourism facilities are the
three leaders of the country.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Poland estimated that

“The total number of agri-tourism farms (farm-stays), rural tourism (rural home-
stays), and eco-tourism accommodation in 2002 as 13154 units, comprising
137164 beds which accommodated 960132 visitors” (Hegarty and Przezborska,
2005). Researches, which are done in the rural tourism leader region
Wielkopolska, expose the motivations of the farmers that direct them to initiate
tourism facilities in their farm.

In Poland, ‘agriculture has adapted relatively quickly to the transition. Instead of a

closed socialist system, there is now a wider global context with domestic farmers

57
and food processors struggling to control the agro-food complex and assert their
own interest’ (Turnock, 1999).

Turnock, (1999) explains the increase on private farming and the process of
privatization of agricultural lands after the communist system in his study.
According to the information that he has given, ‘some people want to use rural
land for non-agricultural purposes as part of a suburbanizing trend towards
gardening and hobby farming by the owners of weekend cottages and by younger
people from the towns who seek an escape from unemployment in small scale
farming’.

Table 4: Comparison of entrepreneurial motivations in Ireland and Poland

Entrepreneurial Motivations of Percentage of Total Number of Rural/Agri-

Wielkopolska Region tourism Enterprises

Financial 95,6

New opportunity/experience/ people/ business 74,9

Decreased revenue from traditional livelihood 17,5

Lifestyle choice/ decision /control density 12,6

Employment opportunity 4,4

Market opportunity (assist farming sales) 0,6

Other reasons (for example, type of market 9,8

opportunity)

Source: Adopted from Hegarty & Przezborska, (2005)

Table 4 demonstrates the comparison of entrepreneurial motivations of rural

tourism enterprises in Poland and Ireland.. In the adoption process of Poland to
market economy, Polish National Tourist Organization, an institute of the Sport of

58
Tourism Administration, and experts from EU member states analyzed the
tourism potential of Poland and identified five alternative types of tourism
products for Poland:

• City and cultural tourism

• Active tourism
• Rural tourism and agri-tourism
• Transit tourism
• Border-zone weekend tourism ( Hegarty and Przezborska, 2005)

Augustyn (1998) presents a critical approach to the sustainable tourism

development model that contains rural tourism adopted from foreign examples
and implemented in Poland. Article particularly emphasizes the lack of the
researches that are vital for the development process of a sustainable tourism
model in Polish areas/regions that were regarded as tourism areas through the
decision of national government that does not include the local participation to the
decision-making process.

In fact, although EU interventions for developing rural tourism in Poland, at the

side of the Polish experience, rural tourism pilot project areas were determined by
the dominance of the government’s decisions. Pilot projects do not reflect the
local communities thoughts about their considerations on their region, therefore
rural tourism was developed as an intervention of the state in Polish rural areas.

Augustyn (1998) also evaluates the sustainable tourism development issue

according to the Inskeep’s sustainable tourism approach and exposes the positive
and negative characteristics of Polish rural tourism strategies.

The positive and negative characteristics of Polish rural strategies are listed on the
Table 5. Given data is important to understand the basic necessities of a well-

59
planned rural tourism model. It is clearly seen that, Poland directed to benefit
from tourism sector’s advantages in a short process.
Table 5: Positive and negative characteristics of Polish Rural Tourism
Strategies
Positive Characteristics of Polish
Tourism Strategies
1. The involvement of, and collaboration
with, national institutions responsible for
environmental protection in the process of
formulating the strategy
2.The identification of tourism activities
within rural areas that preserve their
environmental and cultural heritage
3.Support for lower levels of government to
develop their own development strategies
consistent with the national strategy
4.The inclusion of tourism in land use
planning
5. The development of public consultation
techniques in order to involve various
stakeholders in making decisions related to
rural tourism development
Source: Adopted from Augustyn, (1998)
Rural Negative Characteristics of Polish
Tourism Strategies
1.Lack of research into the
environmental, cultural and economic
effects of rural tourism development
prior to the choice of areas where rural
tourism is to be developed
2.Lack of development of models for
appropriate levels of tourism
development in rural areas (e.g.
carrying capacities) and sustainable
economic indicators (e.g. ‘sustainable
income’)
3.Lack of standards and regulations for
environmental and cultural impact
assessment, monitoring and auditing of
existing and proposed tourism
development projects
4.Lack of environmental accounting
systems for rural tourism
5.Lack of involvement of local
communities and all providers of
tourism services in making decisions
related to rural tourism development
6.Lack of representatives of indigenous
populations on rural tourism advisory
boards
7.Lack of educational and awareness
programs which would sensitize people
to the issues of sustainable rural
tourism development (the emphasis is
placed on the economic effects of rural
tourism development
60
Ireland model was implemented in Poland through the experience of increasing
rural tourism sector in Ireland with the financial support of EU, but because of
several differences between the two countries, Polish rural tourism sector reflects
some negative characteristics more than positive characteristics of rural tourism
strategies.

In Poland, rural tourism development process is managing by only one legislative

regulation of Polish State Sport and Tourism Administration (UKFIT) with weak
relations among the other administrative units and sectors. Rural tourism
generally does not have an agricultural characteristic; it generally aims to submit
employment facilities mainly such as rural accommodation in the rural areas
because women and young people having tendency for migration to urban areas.
‘Based upon the objectives of the overall strategy for the Polish tourism product
development, five-year strategic plans for rural tourism development and its
promotion were formulated’ (Augustyn, 1998).

(Hegarty & Przezborska, 2005), identifies three types of entrepreneurship

according to the tourism dependency for Polish farms:

• Directly related to tourism activity: In these type of tourism activities,

enterprises get their main source of money from tourism sector
• Indirectly related to tourism activity: It is the typical small-scale family
business specifically connected to farms in Poland that earning
additionally income from tourism
• Indirectly related to tourism activity and non-integrated to tourism
development: These are micro-scale enterprises deriving tourism income
through various activities.

These are known as the main implementation forms of rural/agri tourism in the
world. The main questions of which one is necessary for what type of regions

61
with the rationalization of the reasons are the directories of the development of a
well-developed rural tourism-planning model.

3.4.2. Agri-tourism Development in Lublin Region

Lublin Region is one of the eastern Poland regions with the agricultural structure.
57% of the total lands of Lublin Region are agricultural, 23% is forests and %20
is other land.

Although the main sector is agriculture in the region, agriculture is attempted to

develop hardly. According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,
there are about 246.000 small farms with the average land area of 6.9ha per farm
and sector is in the tendency of development with the encouragements of EU
financial support programs.

Map shows the distribution of the sectors that are tourism, internet technologies,
mechanical engineering, agro-business and environmental technologies.
‘According to the Main Statistical Office, 278.600 people are working in the
agriculture sector at the end of the 2004’ (Sector profile report of INTERREG
IIIC Project). The report also exposes the strengths, weakness, opportunities and
threats of the region through a SWOT analyses study in Table 6.

In Lublin Region, there are 11 associations and 300 agri-tourism farms offer 2500
beds for tourists per year (Szymoniuk, 2003). As it is said above, in Poland Rural
Tourism has a women initiative characterization and in Lublin Region about 75%
of the agri-tourism farms are owned or managed by rural women.

62
Map 1: Map of the Lublin- Lubelska Region
Source: Map is taken from Sector Profile Report of INTERREG IIIC Project.

It may be say that, in the Lublin region, local administrations and local people are
still not well-developed through the effects of the governance system that
dominates the national government through the traditional features coming from
the communist system. However, local people are learning and become familiar
with the opportunities of the new European system and the developing awareness
help to improving the regional administrative mechanisms.

63
 Table 6: SWOT Analyses for Lublin Region

STRENGHTS
• Extremely favorable conditions
for agricultural production in the
region
• Dominant position in
agricultural production of many
goods in Poland
• Relatively strong support from
sector institutions and organization
• Well developed sphere of
agricultural sciences in the region
OPPORTUNITIES
• Good assessment of Polish
food products in EU states
• Increase in extra-regional
export and in export to international
markets
• Expected considerable funds
transfers (direct subsidies and
resources for investments)
• Rise in income for people
employed in this sector
WEAKNESS
• High fragmentation of agriculture
• Low qualifications of farmers
• High level of employment in agricultural
sector
• Low agricultural productivity
• Insufficient support from food industry
• Rural mentality - reluctance towards
change and modernization
THREATS
• Competitive products from other EU
markets
• Migration from rural areas
• Necessity to adjust agricultural production
to EU and international standards

Source: Sector Profiles Report INTERREG IIIC Project

As in all regions of Poland, agri-tourism clusters constitute the core of the agri-
tourism development in the local level and the agri-tourism clusters constitute the
local associations representing their benefits and rights at the regional and
national level. By the way of clustering, the farmers offering agri-tourism services
aim to cooperate for their benefits on the various issues although they are the
competitors of an increasing sector. The farmers empower their relations not only
in their own clustering units, but also with the neighboring clusters, institutions,
and the Regional Center for Agricultural Consultancy.

Szymoniuk, (2003), categorizes the objectives of the clusters which justify the
need to integrate, such as:
• Joint marketing projects

64
 • Supervision of the quality of the services
• Lobbying
• Applications for subsidies

At the regional level there is no regulation or regional law regulating the agri-
tourism services. Regional Center for Agricultural Consultancy is an information
center for providing knowledge to farmers about the national regulations or
several agricultural skills.

Examining the formation of agri-tourism development process, dominance of the

national governmental role is seen clearly. The organizational and functional
relations are presented in the Figure 4.

3.4.3. The Planning Mechanisms of The Rural Tourism Development Process

in Lublin Region
At the regional level, Regional Chamber of Tourism and Consortium of the
Tourist Organization are the responsible institutions for the development of
tourism in the Region.

However, in Poland all types of tourism is planning and managing by the national
administration, therefore the role of the regional institutions are not regulative;
they provide the information for local people that they need.

The relationships between the administrative units and planning mechanisms

submitted in the Figure 4, descriptive way is utilized to explain the relations in a
simpler manner. By this reason, through grouping the relations drawn in the
Figure 4, four main mechanisms are described as:

65
a) Legislative-Regulative Support Mechanism: UKFIT’s laws and
EU PHARE Program act as the legislative support mechanism. EU
PHARE program is a financial and informational support program
for the candidate members for EU.
b) Financial Support Mechanism: In the Lublin example EU is the
only financial supporter mechanism of the development projects,
which are developed by the Poland’s national government.
c) Monitoring Mechanism: National administrative units implement
the monitoring mechanism in addition to the legislative-regulative
support role.
d) Action Mechanism: Agri-tourism clusters acts as the action
mechanism by the supports of the mechanism listed above.
e) Human Resources Mechanism: The general status of the region
members.

66
 EC PHARE TOURIN PROGRAM

FUND

Polish State Sport and Tourism Administration

(UKFIT)

Polish Ministry of Agriculture

Official Program Management Unit (PMU)

Polish Federation of Agri-tourism

Regional Centers for Agricultural Counselling

Local Agri-tourism Associations

Figure 4: Figure of Agri-tourism Development Processes in Lublin Region

67
3.5. Agri-tourism in Italy

3.5.1. An Overview for Agri-tourism Sector in Italy

Italy is known as one of the countries, which have strong agricultural economy in
the world. Also, agri-tourism is the fastest growing form of tourism in Italy (Veer
and Tuunteer, 2005).

Italy is one of the oldest members of EU and the reformed CAP, meanwhile
helped to empower the Italian agriculture and food sector. But while agriculture
sector developed, at same time unfair conditions for some regions or part of the
regions with the various disadvantaged conditions of the area.

Agri-tourism was thought to benefit in these types of areas by the decisions of

national and regional administrations and EU financial supports. Essentially, in
the Italian rural regions have tourism demand every time with the general
emphasize on every dimension of Italian culture.

The first and main knowledge about Italian agri-tourism model is its agricultural
based dimension. In other words, in Italy agri-tourism is not a tourism activity
according to the national law, but an agricultural event because it is aimed to
protect the agricultural lands.

In Italy, national government acts as one of the three legislative mechanisms with
the national law for agri-tourism in Italy. Italian National Framework Law n
730of 5 December 1985 defines the agri-tourism activity as a complementary
element to agriculture sector. The law was updated and developed as Law No 96
of 20 February 2006

Another important point of tourism in Italian rural areas is diversification of the

tourism types in the rural areas. National and regional policy makers identify

68
many of tourism types for presenting the Italian rural regions with regional
tourism images.

According to the 2005’s numbers, “the number of farms offering some kind of
tourist services has doubled to 12.500 units in 2003 with a turnover of 750 million
euros. 10.000 units accommodation, 7.500 units of restaurants, 930 units of
camping facilities and 1.520 units of horse riding” (OECD, 2005b).

Today, Italy is known with wine, oil, traditional foods and life styles. For
achieving the regional development, structural funds utilized to improve
awareness of local people, environmental and cultural values. Tuscany Region has
the biggest economy and service on agri-tourism. Region is known in the world
by its wines and wine-path tourism.

3.5.2. Agri-tourism Development in the Tuscany Region

In the Tuscany Region, four mechanisms of the development process works
according to the Tuscany’s regional rural development.

Tuscany Region attracts tourists by its historical, cultural and environmental

properties for the very long times. Regional administrators preferred to develop
agri-tourism in the region, although the presence of touristic demand. Because of
the exceeding demand the carrying capacity of the region and deteriorating the
tourism product. Tuscany case is important because of this reason to expose the
establishment the sustainable tourism in a high density of tourism center.

“Tuscany is situated in Central Italy and has a population of three and half million
people and a geographical extension of about 23 thousand square kilometer, with
a density of about 155 inhabitants per square kilometer” (OECD, 2005b).

69
Tuscany divided into seven territorial systems with 287 municipalities, 10
provinces and 20 mountain communities as (EC, 2006):

1. Open urban systems-cities that are the strong knots of the interregional
network (for example, Florence, Siena, Lucca)
2. Regional urban systems- cities providing the region with services (Pisa,
Loverno)
3. Open industrial systems-export oriented industrial districts (Parto, Arezzo,
Pistoia)
4. Tourist-industrial systems- based on both activities with less industry
(Prato, Arezzo, Pistoia)
5. Open tourist systems- areas with strong international presence (Viareggio,
Forte dei Marmi, Elba Island)
6. Tourist-rural systems- rural areas with diffusion of second houses
(Maremma, Siena)
7. Marginal systems- mountain areas

Table 7: Table presents Tuscany in numbers

TUSCANY NUMBER
Population (inhabitants) 3.565.00
Provinces 10
Mountain Communities 20
Communes 287

Source: Comparative Case Study, IT

In Tuscany, agri-tourism activities are planed, managed and financed under the
encouragement of the European Rural Development Policies. Agri-tourism sector
is developed under the Local action program –LEADER- according to the
incitements of the local participation and local responsibilities those also lead to
increase in the effects of farm level in the process.

70
Agri-tourism is developed in the region as complementary element for the
income. Agricultural product diversification, adding value to the products and
direct marketing constitutes the cores of agri-tourism in Tuscany and the regional
law introduces the notion as an opportunity and a challenge for rural
areas(Sonnino, 2004).

Map 2: Tuscany Map

Source: (OECD, 2005b)

‘The link between agri-tourism and sustainable rural development has recently
been made more explicit in the political discourse of Tuscany’ (Sonnino, 2004).
Rural Development Plan ‘designed to achieve external coherence with the
principles of sustainable development’ (Sonnino, 2004). And ‘agritourism is
listed, along with the evolution of typical products and the development of

71
organic agriculture, among strategies that have halted the rural exodus and
revitalized rural areas’ (Sonnino, 2004).

Under the lights of this information, it is seen that the planning process
mechanisms work good as a coordination success of the national, regional and
local units. Good-working coordination among the different levels; is represented
in the Figure 5. Scheme in particularly, underlines in the Tuscany model the
collaboration of EU and the regional government. Also establishment of LAG
(Local Action Groups) make understand the roles of local people in a bottom-up
approach of sustainable development process.

As it is seen in the Figure 5, regional administration has relations within all the
levels of Tuscan’s agri-tourism development process. Figure 5 also makes
understand the importance of a bottom-up approaches in the development of
private sector through the relations for benefits of each groups. Therefore, as a
general understanding, sustainable tourism development needs the coordination of
common benefits of different groups, in other words it encourages a co-operative
manner for the competitive groups because of their common benefits.

In Tuscan model, there are three political support mechanisms: EU-LEADER

Program, Italian National Law, Framework Law n 730of 5 December 1985, as the
first one, The Agriculture Sector Orientation and Modernization Law of 15 June
2001 and Regional Laws, Regional Law 5/95, Regional Law 53/ 1997, Regional
Law 41/1998, Regional Law 01/2005.

The financial support mechanisms of the process are EU LEADER program.

Program provides the financial resource to local projects and directs the regional
administration for distribution of the financial resources. Also the National Law n
423 of 30 December 1991 regulates the fiscal regime for the farms serving agri-
touristic services through not to reducing but simplification of the taxes.As it is
explained before, legislative-regulative mechanism acts at the regional level in all

72
of the regions in Italy. Regional Rural Development Plan of Tuscany Region
identifies the roles of each unit and determines the regulations and rules by the
participation of local associations.

European Rural Development Policy

National Government

ANAGRITUR
National
Law

AGRITURIST
EUROPEAN

LEADER

INITIATIVE

Regional Rural
Regional Government Development
Program

Municiplity(Public)

L Local Rural
Universities
A Development
Private sector
G Farm Trade
Unions(Private)

Figure 5: Sheme of Agri-tourism Development Processes in Tuscany Region

73
Action mechanism takes place in the local level by local action groups that are
constituted of municipalities and farm trade units, with the participation of private
sector and education units.

3.6. Conclusion

The types of developmental structure for rural/agri-tourism are examined under

the two comparative examples above. Data obtaining as the consequence of the
comparison is listed in Table 8.

According to the data that is given in Table 8, the most effective criteria for agri-
tourism development should be listed as:

• Bottom-up approach that allows the participation of the local people to the
process
• Linking with agriculture sector provides sustainability of agricultural lands
and agricultural production
• Advertisement of the sector as a regional/local image
• Specific legislations and regulations for the sector
• Small size of farms are more appropriate for agri-tourism development
• Tourism conscious and culture of the local people effects on the sector
positively

74
Table 8: Differences and similarities between Lublin and Tuscany Regions

CRITERIA/ POLAND -Lublin ITALY-Tuscany Region

DIFFERENCES Region

Bottom-up approach Weak Strong

Linking tourism with agriculture Weak Strong

Regional Image Weak Strong

Diversification in tourism product Low High

Share of agricultural tourism in Very low Moderate/increasing

overall tourism sector

Legislative-Regulative Specialized for tourism Specialized for agriculture

Mechanism sector sector

Financing mechanism EU-PHARE Program+ EU- LEADER program +

National Government National Government

Monitoring Mechanism Central Monitoring Local Monitoring

Action Mechanism Weak Strong

Human Resources Mechanism Weak Strong

CRITERIA/ POLAND –Lublin ITALY-Tuscany Region

SIMILARITIES Region

Size of agri-tourism farms Small Small

Tradition of rural tourism Long Long

75
Agri-tourism planning process should be analyzed in five steps. Table 9 exposes
the development steps and the related management process of agri-tourism
planning.

Table 9: Agri-tourism development and management process

STEPS
1.Identifying the objectives
PROCESS
• Identifying the objectives
• Comparing the objectives
• Integration of the objectives with the
more

2. Researches • Quantitative data

• Qualitative data
• Social, economic, political and
environmental factors

3.Analyses and Synthesis • Evaluating the data

4. Suggestions
5.Implication and Management
• Reflection to future of the necessities
and capacities
• Preparation of alternative plans
• Deciding upon the most appropriate
policies
• Implication
• Monitoring
• Evaluating process

Source: Table that is adopted from Shapley and Sharpley, (1997) is taken
from Gündüz, (2004)

Agri-tourism development process is examined according to two comparative

examples in this chapter. Examples show the required mechanisms and their
relationship to make understand the sector’s development process. Examining the
process through two different examples with the different aims and types of
governance show there are same mechanisms but the relations among these
mechanisms should be different in the agri-tourism development process. These
processes are:

76
a) Legislative-Regulative Support Mechanism
Among the five mechanisms of agri-tourism planning, legislative and regulative
mechanism may be evaluated as the primary one because of its directory role on
defining the action, determining the activity area, determining the legislative
rights, status and the responsibilities of the people in relation with the law,
encouragement of the society for the entrepreneurship and gaining the control on
the action. Laws on agri-tourism must serve equivalent opportunities and prevent
the unfair competitiveness for the benefit groups.

The primary role of the administrative unit is preparing the legislative dimension
to draw the general framework of the action by the laws. The laws are also the
legislative instruments that present:

• Definition of the agri-tourism action is given and the aim and

limitations of the action is determined clearly
• The legal rights and responsibilities of the entrepreneurs. These laws
are also necessary for the human rights for preventing the unfair
competition
• The necessary mechanisms and their relationships effected on the
planning process

As the secondary study, planning institute’s legislative and/or regulative

mechanism ascertains the agri-tourism development areas and regions through the
analyses and identifies the characteristics of the agri-tourism activities and
facilities.

b) Financial Support Mechanism

This mechanism is the mechanism that constitute of internal and external financial
resources that provide the financial requirements of the implementing process.
Determining the needed financial amounts and sharing of the funds fairly is

77
crucial and must be regulated in the planning studies. Nowadays there are various
institutions providing funds for the development projects in the world. Especially
the underdeveloped countries need to benefit from these funds. However,
appropriate institutionalization is required for these kinds of financial supports
and it is the role of central administrations. Also, the local and national sponsors
should be effective on the agri-tourism development.
c) Monitoring Mechanism
The overall aim of the monitoring mechanism, that may be identified national,
regional and local level, is controlling the established agri-tourism system
whether the implementations are appropriate for the rules. Quality management is
all about regular monitoring and evaluation of impacts on the visitor, enterprises,
the environment and the local community (EC, 2002) According to the Williams
et. al., (2001) monitoring mechanism procedures and measures provide:

• Encouragement of the development of quality accommodation and catering

facilities
• Encouragement of the implementation of the regulations and the rules
• Encouragement of preventing the unfair competition.

d) Action Mechanism
Implementing an agri-tourism development plan is dependent on the existence of
the determination of the necessities for the action and the required roles. The
actors acting on the implementation process, such as NGOs, municipalities,
universities, farmer unions and local people, constitute the action mechanism.
Action mechanism includes the activities such as innovation on infrastructure,
education, and restoration of the accommodation units, advertisement of the
project. This mechanism may work in various forms according to the undertaking
responsibility of the process and the democracy culture of the societies.

78
An advertisement facility of the project takes place in this mechanism and the
possible advertisement activities should be prepared in all the levels of the
countries. As an example, in Italy (Brunori&Rossi, 2000):

Wine producers have been participating in an open cellar initiative. On the same day,
all over the country, farms open their doors to the public and producers receive visitors
personally. National Association of Wine Cities promotes the star goblets initiative.

Also, festivals and special day ceremonies are another advertisement facilities of
the projects with their local characteristics.

e) Human Resources Mechanism

Human Resources Mechanism may be identified as the human skills of the
community and its relations and socio-economic effects on the market economy.
Marks-Bielska and Bialobrezeska (2003) identifies the human resources as:

In modern market economy the quality of human resources forms one of the most
important factors of competition in a region. It is understood as the status of community
members, health state, the level of education, professional qualifications and general
knowledge that enables their change in the course of professional life, the state of
services that decide upon the aforementioned (schools, medical service, courses for
adults), the attitude of the local community members towards the technical innovations as
one of the main factors of local development.

Agri-tourism sector needs conscious and educated people about the required skills
of being a tourism operator as well as hospitable and conscious about
participation to the decision-making process because ‘the benefits of agri-tourism
and value-added processing are likely to be more positive if local people have
some control over such forms of development. Local involvement and partnership
allow the comparative advantages of groups of farms from specific regions to
create unique market positions (Agri-tourism Market Development Status Report
of British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Ministry of
Small Business, Tourism and Culture, 2001, p: 76).

79
 CHAPTER 4

AGRI-TOURISM IN TURKEY

4.1.Introduction
Tourism is a global activity in today’s world. Planning tourism activities is
gaining more importance for the countries that utilize the tourism resources in the
most effective way in order to obtain the desired revenue figures. According to
the WTO tourism sector will be the most developed sector in the next twenty
years. Numbers given in Table 10 indicate the increasing demand for the tourism
sector in the world and Turkey in twenty years.

Table 10: Tourist numbers, tourism revenues and tourism shares of the sector
between 1980-2001

YEARS SHARES
1980 2001 1980 2001
TOTAL NUMBER OF 285 Million 692.7 100 100
TOURIST (WORLD) Million

TOURISM REVENUES 92 Billion 465 Billion 100 100

(WORLD) US US

TOTAL NUMBER OF 1.2 Million 11.6 Million 0,42 1,67

TOURIST (TURKEY)

TOURISM REVENUES 400 Million 10,1 Billion 0,43 2,17

(TURKEY) US US

Source: Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 2003. Data is adopted from Tezcan,
(2004)

80
Table 10 shows the increasing revenue and the shares in the total numbers of
tourism sector for Turkey between the 1980 and 2001and exposes the effects of
tourism planning in Turkey in 1980s.

There is still no research about the numbers and revenues of rural tourism in the
world and Turkey. Turkish official reports (e.g. national development plans)
about national and rural development of Turkey indicate the increasing demand
for nature-based tourism in Turkey and the necessity of planning the nature-based
tourism sector for the vitality of natural life and areas.

Turkey is a tourism country that may respond the developments and the
transformations in the world’s tourism tendencies. Directing the increasing tourist
potential from coastal areas to the alternative areas should be evaluated as an
opportunity for Turkey with the existence of natural and cultural facilities.

Developing tourism in a region that has touristic attraction elements and

intensifying tourism activities in those places take more time than the desired one.
It requires allocating a large amount of financial resources to the sector for
constructing the infrastructure and superstructures of the region (Tutar & Tutar,
2004).

4.2. Rural Development Approach in Turkey

In Turkey, there are 3 million agricultural business enterprises that families
constitute more than half of this number. Average area of business enterprises is 6
hectares and 33% of employers of Turkish people employ in agricultural sector.
Comparing with EU, while there are 13 million enterprises in EU, average
agricultural area is 13 hectares and employment share of agricultural employment
is less then 5% (Yılmaz, 2005).

81
Numbers show the disadvantaged conditions of rural areas in Turkey. According
to Yılmaz (2005), under the Turkish rural development context looking for
solutions, the resources that will be utilized in the rural development approach
includes three main areas as:

• Precautions for agricultural production that is in relation with

environmental conservations
• Establishing activities and projects that aim to improve the agricultural
productivity
• Establishing projects that aim diversification of non-agricultural income
resources

In Table 11, it is identified the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of

rural area conditions in Turkey. Analysis indicates a rural tourism potential,
however the weaknesses and threats may be serious obstacles for rural tourism
and agri-tourism development.

The projects that aim to improve the life conditions of rural population and to
develop the rural regions are realized in two stages i.e. non-planned period and
planned period. Nowadays, the planned term also includes the regulations
according to the EU adoption process.

82
Table 11: SWOT matrix of the rural areas in Turkey
Strengths
• Existence of large agricultural lands and
the existence of irrigation possibilities
• Richness of agricultural production
potential and diversification in product
• Diversification in agricultural industry
and raw material
• Productive effort potential
• Diversification on local products that may
be mark
• Transportation, communication and
electric potential
• Richness of fauna and floristic properties
• Richness of cultural and touristic
potential
• Richness of handicrafts
• Experience of rural development practices
• Increasing numbers of NGOs work for
rural development
• Widespread public organizations
Opportunities
• Development tendency of non-
agricultural sectors
• Development in conscious of consumers
on healthy and organic products
• Increase in rural tourism potential
• Participation and adoption process to EU
• Developments in production,
communication technologies
• Development of urban economies
• Developments in the roles and effectives
of local administrations
Source: Data is taken from National Rural Development Strategy
Document, 2006
83
Weaknesses
• Rural employment and incomes are
generally dependent on agricultural
facilities
• Problems of agricultural structure
• Poverty especially in villages in forest
areas
• Insufficient amounts in educations,
(especially girls)
• Necessity for the modernization in
rural infrastructure
• Problems related to the usage of natural
resources
• Insufficient quality of soil, erosion,
• Insufficient public services
• Insufficient data needed for analyzing
the economic and social structures of
rural areas
Threats
• Changing tendencies on agricultural
support policies and easier conditions
for international trade
• Increase in unemployment and poverty
amounts under the process of
restructuring the agricultural sector
• Migration of young population,
• The harmful effects of tourism on
natural resources
• Increase in inequalities in the regions
and between regions
• Increase in the cost of petrol in the
world
The situation of numbers of the rural population and urban population listed in
Table 12. Table shows the increasing migration tendency in Turkey.

Table 12: Changing population of rural and urban areas in Turkey between
the years of 1927-2003

RURAL URBAN
YEARS POPULATION POPULATION TOTAL

NUMBERS % NUMBERS %
1927 10.3 75.8 3.3 24.2 13.6
1940 13.4 75.6 4.3 24.4 17.8
1950 15.7 75.0 5.2 25.0 20.9
1960 18.8 68.1 8.8 31.9 27.7
1970 21.9 61.6 13.6 38.4 35.6
1980 25.0 56.1 19.6 43.9 44.7
1985 23.7 47.0 26.8 53.0 50.6
1990 23.1 41.0 33.3 59.0 56.4
2000 23.8 35.1 44.0 64.9 67.8
2003 24.1 33.8 47.1 66.2 71.3

Source: DIE, (2003)

Diversification of tourism activities in Turkey should be realized by the

opportunity of high potential of natural, historical and cultural resources such as
plates, lakes, and thermal resources of the country.

It may be said that, in Turkish legislative area, some concepts about nature-based
tourism activities are not determined through a specific approach. Rural tourism
concept takes place in the legacy of Ministry of Culture and Tourism (KTB) with
very general definitions through the Regulation for Rural Tourism. Necessity of
planning process for rural tourism development takes place in the related

84
regulation but according to the information gaining from KTB, in Turkey there is
still no rural tourism facility that has rural tourism facility certificate.

Alternative tourism activities started to develop in the early 1990s. Priorities of

the diversification of tourism activities that KTB has started under the general
approach of alternative tourism generally include plate tourism, trekking and
rafting (Pirselimoğlu, 2007). The national strategy presented in the Sixth National
Development Plan about tourism development asserting that ‘Winter, hunting,
water sports, festivals, youth, congress, thermal, golf and third age tourism
activities will develop’, lead the development of the sector.

Planning term in Turkey, makes the mass tourism sector is one of the biggest
sector. According to the agri-tourism development in Turkey, subject should be
examined through three periods.

4.3. The Republic Period - (1923-1950)

This period includes the years between 1923 and 1950. This period includes the
innovations in agricultural area. The agricultural and rural development issues
within the national development arena begin with modernization effort of Turkey
by the establishing of the Turkish Republic. These years were the times with the
large amount of rural population living in the rural areas and the economy that
dependent on agricultural production. Before the planning period starts in 1963,
The Village Legislation, The First Economy Congress, The First Village and
Agriculture Congress, Legislation for Making Farmers Land-owners were the
activities of the term relates the rural development issue (Aksoy et. al, 2007).

As the redevelopment approach, Ataturk Forest Farm (AOÇ) may be accepted as

the first and one of the most crucial examples for integration of the agriculture,
development and redevelopment concepts in Turkey. AOÇ was established in
1925 with the name of Gazi Farms by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s directories

85
through a series of desires and objectives this project is important for this study
with its characteristic that integrating agriculture and recreation.

In the letter numbered 4/545, which was written to the Prime Minister’s Office in
order to make AOÇ operate under Prime Minister’s Office in June 1937, M.
Kemal Atatürk explains the two main functions of establishing AOÇ as:

1. Establishing examples of modern agricultural systems. Constituting and

integrating the circles of a chain from production to consumption
2. Creating a beautiful environment and providing an area for resting,
enjoying for people

In 1938, farm is given to operate under the Institute of National Agriculture

Enterprises. Then after it was taken under the operation of National Production
Farms since 1950, it is still an institution of depended on Agriculture Ministry
(TKB) with the name of AOÇ since 1950.

Establishing a this kind of multifunctional agricultural production system in these

years is a vital example for not only the agricultural production, but also for
improving the conscious of people about the importance of agriculture and its
directory function for the society providing recreational facilities.

The first years of Turkish Republic, a number of innovation legislation took place
on the agricultural area. They should be summarized as 442 numbered Village
Legislation in 1924, establishing of Institute of National Agriculture Enterprises
through the 3308 numbered law in 1938, 4753 numbered Making Farmers Land-
owners Legislation and establishing of National Production Farms in 1950 by the
5433 numbered law.

86
4.4. The First Liberal Period - (1950-1963):
In this period making farmers landowner was continued through the law 4753.
The most important feature of this period is beginning of the agriculture with
tractor. This leaded to more agricultural production and caused to necessity for
more agricultural land. And this situation caused to transformation of state lands
and grasslands into agricultural lands (Çecik, 2002).

Making Farmers Land-owners Legislation has changed for two times in 1950 and
1955. Agriculture with motor power through the Marshall subsidies leaded the
basement of today’s current agricultural and rural position of Turkey.

4.5. The Period of State Planning Organization / The Term of

Five Year Development Plans - (1963 -)
The period begins with the first five-year plan for the years of 1963-1967 with the
aim of benefiting from planning for the effectiveness in realization of social and
economic. Tourism sector has taken place in all five-year development plans of
Turkey as one of the vital economic development tools. The relationship between
rural development and the tourism in five-year plans is submitted as a
development objective in the Eight Five-Year Plan.

4.5.1. Legislative-Regulative Mechanism Related To Agri-tourism

Development in Turkey
Erdoğan (2003) explains the role of the legislative- regulative mechanism as:

The legislative force that plays role on the formation of the tourism industry may be defined
as the cooperative economic, national and international structures that make the laws or
effects on the law making process. Legislative forces may be verified from the NGOs to
supreme courte. Through the legislative regulations relations are directed as desired and
through the monitoring mechanisms, the relations desired to control.

87
4.5.1.1.The Eight National Five-Year Development Plan
The Eight National Five-Year Development Plan submits more articles about
rural development issue than the articles related to development objectives of
tourism in rural areas. Tourism strategies of this plan generally concentrate on
technical issues such as educational issues, certification programs.

In the rural development section of seventh chapter related to objectives and

policies of regional development, Article 579 indicates that enhancing the rural
potentials and increasing the income and employment are the basic of rural
development through the sustainable development principles.
Article 580 defines the priorities on:

• Increasing the employment in rural areas

• Improving the human resources
• Enhancing the economic activities that lead to increase the income of rural
population
• Improving the life qualities
• Effective cooperation and participation o local people on each level of
administration
• Improving the participation of NGO’s in the development process

And Article 584 indicates that for realization of the objectives listed above, the
areas having local potential such as tourism, handcrafts, stockbreeding and
weaving, will be encouraged and it will be given more emphasis on improving
economic and social infrastructures for the migrated people who wants return
home.

In the Eight Five Year Plan, tourism development issue is evaluated in the Article
1572 saying about the measures that will be taken for enlargement of the tourism
season for the whole year according to the new demands.

88
Article 1586 mentions about developing new tourism areas for golf, winter,
mountain, thermal, health, yacht, congress and ecotourism. Also in Article 1587 it
is mentioned about developing the ecotourism sector in National Parks with the
aim of enhancing sustainable tourism.

4.5.1.2. The Ninth Five-Year Development Plan and The Rural Development
Policies Special Expertise Sub-Commission Report
The rural development vision for the year 2013 in the Ninth Development Plan
The Rural Development Policies Special Expertise Sub-Commission Report is
presented as ‘For helping the rural population to be employed locally and have
human living conditions Turkey should invest in sustainable development that is
efficient, wide-spread and protecting natural and cultural resources by taking a
cooperative and integrative approach’ (IX. Development Plan, The Rural
Development Policies Special Expertise Sub-Commission Report, p: 117).

Its main aim is decreasing and removing the weakness of the rural areas and
improving the strengths and evaluating the opportunities through a sustainable
manner listed in the Table 11. The plan also identifies the instruments that should
be utilized for arriving the objectives of the plan as developing integrative and
sustainable programs and projects that:

• Emerge and increase income for rural people

• Improve the human and natural resources as the main principle
• Enhance the local cooperative approaches and participation to the
process
• Gain the maximum coordination between related central and local
administrations and render it sustainable

89
Report also emphasize the necessity of the congruity of the projects to the
participation process to EU and the essential characteristics of them that enhance
the alternative non-agricultural employment

The Ninth Five-Year Development Plan is the first national development plan that
attracts more attention on rural tourism and agri-tourism. In this plan agri-tourism
is determined as a specific term that is distinct from rural tourism. In the ninth
development plan, rural tourism is defined as ‘Rural tourism is not only farm
tourism or agricultural tourism, it also includes holidays in natural areas, nature-
based tourism activities, tour operations to rural areas, spend time in rural life and
production and selling of handcrafts’.

It gives place to an evaluation of KTB emphasizing the role of rural tourism on

young population, women and the socialization process of the whole community
as well as local economy. Plan explains the positive effects of rural tourism for
rural development as:

• Employment and diversification on job potentials

• Developing of service sector
• Diversification of agricultural production methods
• Evaluating the forests close to the urban areas with the recreational aim
• Conserving the rural landscapes
• Decreasing or preventing the migration
• Conserving the historical structure
• Developing of the conscious of the importance of nature
• Developing the handicrafts
• Improving the life conditions of rural women socially and economically
• Improving the new initiatives and ideas

90
In the page 128 of the ninth plan, the priorities and the precautions of the plan are
defined in seven groups:
The fourth one includes non-agricultural employment, diversification of the
income resources and supporting the entrepreneurship in rural regions. To realize
this precedence, the plan highlights nine expedients including rural tourism as one
of most important ones.

The expedients related to tourism development are:

• Establishing a rural tourism network and educational programs about job

skills and consultancy service programs
• Ascertaining the areas/region that have tourism potential and determining
the pilot regions for the pilot rural tourism projects and settlement areas
• Preparing action plans under the leadership of local administrations and
supporting the rural tourism activities of NGOs
• Supporting the agri-tourism activities
• Encouragement of the local handicrafts production
• Ascertaining and the restoration of the historical values in the rural areas
and encouragement of gain this potential to tourism sector

Also the seventh precedence about the sharing the authority among the public
institutions, improving the coordination and developing the cooperation with the
NGOs, submits an expedient for rural tourism, agri-tourism and eco-tourism
development as gaining the coordination among the TKB, Ministry of
Environment and Forestry (ÇOB) and KTB.

About the implementation strategies, this plan presents the necessity of revising
and making laws for nature-based tourism development. The ninth development
plan makes a distinction between agri-tourism and rural tourism in the page
according to the administration of the activity. Plan says that the appropriate
administrative and institutional units that are established under the TKB should

91
enhance coordination, encouragement and orientation of the agri-tourism
activities. The plan indicates the KTB as the responsible administrative institution
for the development of rural tourism activities and determines the necessity of a
rational evaluation to analysis the institutional capacities of these administrative
institutions for the given responsibilities.

The Ninth Development Plan serves more serious and detailed approaches for
agri-tourism and rural tourism development among the all development plans. It
is understood that, agri-tourism is aimed to develop as a complementary element
for the agricultural producers. According to the plan agri-tourism will be
developed under the development axis increasing the comparative potential and
locally institutionalization of the public administrative units. Under the
information of the ninth plan, it may definitely say that, the ninth plan makes
correct the hypothesis of this study that agri-tourism should be planning element
for the rural development approach in Turkey.

However, although the ninth plan rural development report indicates agri-tourism
as an alternative development potential in Turkey, plan does not include the
determination of the types of agricultural lands that are suggested for agri-tourism
development. Because agri-tourism should be a complementary element for the
agriculture sector, the role of agri-tourism and the types of the land the agri-
tourism should be implemented on must be defined clearly in the agri-tourism
development plans for the future of the agri-tourism and agriculture sectors.

4.5.1.3. Tourism Encouragement Law

For regulating, developing and providing a structure to tourism sector, in
12.03.1982, 2634 numbered Tourism Encouragement Law is declared in the
Official Gazzette (Tezcan, 2004). Then, the new law 4957/2634 is stated as the
following four purposes:

92
 • Determining the precautions and regulations for developing and
regulating the tourism sector, and providing a dynamic structure and
operation for the sector
• Ascertaining the tourism services and the culture and tourism
development and protection areas
• Encouraging the tourism investments and operations
• Monitoring and controlling the investments and operations

This law declares the KTB as the responsible institution of tourism development
in Turkey. According to the law, KTB has the authorization for making the
tourism plans at all levels. Law also indicates the criteria related to culture and
tourism development regions and areas and presents encouragement facilities of
the tourism investments and operations, protection criteria for the natural and
cultural values.

Law 4957 is the determiner of the tourism development issues in Turkey. The law
also states the KTB as the responsible institution of monitoring and controlling.
However the law does not present regulation about the tourism activities in the
agricultural lands.

The required legislative regulation about agri-tourism activities also relates the
TKB. Therefore, it may be say that, new regulation and laws are necessary for
development of the agri-tourism sector in Turkey.

4.5.1.4. Governmental Regulations for Rural Tourism Facilities

In the sixth chapter of Governmental Regulations of Rural Tourism Facilities,
general features of a farm house-village house are identified. Regulation
emphasizes the importance of the agricultural activities for the vitality of the
natural and cultural heritage of the rural areas. And through this vitality,
regulation indicates the feature of a farm/village house as:

93
 • Innovation of the present buildings and the new buildings have to be
constructed appropriate for the characteristics of the essence structure of the
buildings
• Determining the bed number capacity through the first feature
• Providing assurance for the protecting the environment of the areas that
tourism sector should be developed in
• Constructed in rural regions with the aim of farm organization; providing
farm production and participation facilities for the tourists to the agricultural
production activities, submitting the rural life conditions
• Minimum five rooms

This regulation does not present a determined regulation for the agri-tourism
facilities. However, the lack of certificated rural tourism initiatives in Turkey
(data was given by KTB) demonstrates the deficiency of the regulation and the
management of the administrative units related to the rural tourism development
issue in Turkey.

4.6. Conclusion
Tourism sector because of its multi-dimensional and dynamic structure needs
interest and supports in the developing plans and policies of the governments
(Ataer et. al, 2003).

In Turkish legislative area, although the existence of the required planning

process is identified in the KTB laws, there is still lack of identifying the required
coordination among the institutions and the required responsibilities of these
institutions for rural tourism development in Turkey.

The non-existence of facilities that have rural tourism certification in Turkey

demonstrates the insufficient policies and interests of the administrative units on
the rural tourism development issue.

94
The development strategy submitted in the IX. Five-Year National Development
Report demonstrates the tendency of benefiting from agri-tourism as a rural and
agricultural development element; distinct from rural tourism, which is under the
development responsibility of KTB, agri-tourism sector is planning to develop
under the TKB responsibility. These conditions indicate the determination of
these two distinct concepts and agri-tourism development areas and also
identifying the legislative rights and responsibilities of the agri-tourism
entrepreneurs legally.

A qualified human resources mechanism plays the leading role on providing the
sustainability of agri-tourism sector. Because agri-tourism is a community-based
tourism development approach, participation of local people in the process has a
cruicial importance for developing the sector in Turkey.

However, insufficient services in the rural areas such as education,

communication, health, are still one of the unsolved most important problem of
Turkey. Therefore, undeveloped human resources mechanism should be the
primary obstacle for developing agri-tourism in Turkey.

Development of rural human resources mechanism issue is also one of the

subjects of Turkish five-year national development plans. Although the plans
emphasize the importance of improving the human resources in rural areas, and
mention about the necessary precautions for the problem, not only with the effect
of insufficient governmental interventions, but also the some ingrained behaviors
of Turkish rural people, solving the problem needs effective rural development
policies and interventions that include development of human resources.

Also another difficulty for developing tourism in rural areas is the integration of
agricultural labor force and tourism labor force (Küçükaltan, 2002). Preventing
the decrease the in agricultural labor force and providing new employment areas

95
through the tourism sector requires an important planning process according to
the Turkish national rural development policies.

Monitoring the tourism activities is the responsibility of KTB according to the

Article 30 of Tourism Encouragement Law. Article indicates the authority of
KTB on monitoring the implementations of certificated investments and facilities
according to the determined regulations of the certification. Law also indicates the
KTB authority on submitting the monitoring action to the other determined person
or institutions.

However, because there is still no legislative area that determines the agri-tourism
facilities, there is still no monitoring mechanism that should be evaluated related
to agri-tourism in Turkey.

96
 CHAPTER 5

RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY

5.1. Material
Agri-tourism development projects and agri-tourism products of villages
constitute the primary material of the case study. Also, the materials of Tekelioğlu
village taking place in the Salihli district of Manisa city and Sarpıncık, Parlak and
Küçükbahçe villages of Karaburun district that are within the borders of İzmir
city, interviews with the agri-tourism entrepreneurs and the project coordinators
and chairman of Karaburun district and the Manisa City Tourism Administrator
about the agri-tourism projects and facilities and the observations for the general
features of the villages and local people are the secondary materials of the study.

Required data for the study were obtained from interviews and observations in
order understand the internal and external factors effecting agri-tourism
development projects. Data gathered from the observations were required not only
for having a general evolution of the project and project areas but also for
confirming the information through interviews and literature review.

Interviews were taken from two agri-tourism entrepreneurs in Tekelioğlu Village

and seven of fifteen agri-tourism entrepreneurs in Karaburun District.

Observations and the photographs were taken from the study areas and the project
details were interpreted and evaluated according to the literature review so as to
determine the present situation of the agri-tourism projects. Also maps defining
the study areas on the basis of various conditions effecting on the tourism process
are used for collecting data.

97
Documents related to the subject are obtained from Karaburun Municipality,
Salihli Chamber of Commerce, Manisa Tourism Administration and Manisa
Administration of Agriculture.

5.2. Case study areas

In order to investigate the current situation of agri-tourism development in
Turkey, two study areas were selected.

The cases, that are the Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism Development Project
and the Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Project, were identified through a series
of criteria in order to obtain the required data for this thesis. They are as follows:

• Having the aim of providing employment and socio-economic

development
• A cooperative structure that different institutions and organizations take
place in
• Constituting an example for the basics of agri-tourism planning in Turkey

Through these criteria, the present agri-tourism projects, Karaburun Women

Project, TA-TU-TA project of Buğday Organization, Kalecik District Agri-
tourism Development Project and Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development Project
were examined through pre-interviews on the phone. Telephone pre-interviews
with the project coordinators and municipalities aimed at briefly learning the
stories behind the projects as well as objectives of the projects. Through these pre-
interviews Tekelioğlu Project and Karaburun Projects were chosen as appropriate
for the research since they met the characteristics defined above.

Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Project and Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism

Development Project are two primary examples for agri-tourism development in
Turkey with their employment fostering and rural development characteristics.

98
Karaburun Project includes 3 villages and 15 women entrepreneurs; Tekelioğlu
Project includes one village and 110 families interested on tourism. Each project
has a cooperative structure constituted with volunteer initiative. While Karaburun
Project is in relation with the Karaburun District’s tourism potential, Tekelioğlu
Project is not in relation with tourism areas.

5.3. Method
SWOT Analysis method is used for evaluating the general conditions of the
projects. The data obtained through interviews, observations and literature review
are grouped into two categories as internal and external factors by SWOT
analysis. While reaching this categorization an interpretative approach was taken.
On the basis of the results, the principles and requirements of agri-tourism
planning in Turkey are determined. This analysis aimed to determine key issues
that help to have a deeper understanding for agri-tourism in Turkey as a planning
element.

What is SWOT Analysis?

SWOT Analysis is firstly utilized in 1970s for business management purposes. In
the following years it was used as an analysis and planning instrument for various
implication areas. By the method with its approach of examining the four
parameters, that are strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the
researched context, it is possible to analyze the qualitative and quantitative
properties of the phenomenon so as to establish the SWOT matrix. Through the
evolution of the matrix a strategic approach for the analyzed structure is
constituted (Uçar, 2005).

SWOT analysis is developed as an instrument for the institutions to provide

maximum benefit from their skills, resources and environmental conditions. In
other words, it is used to obtain data for planning activities.

99
 Examination of Environment

Internal Analyses External Analyses

Strengths Weakness Opportunities Threats

SWOT MATRIX
Figure 6: General structure of SWOT Analysis
Source: Pirselimoğlu, (2007)

5.4.Case study
Case study was employed in order to have an overview about the agri-tourism
activities in Turkey. It is an exploratory research focused on determining the
major issues underlying agri-tourism planning, as well as on analyzing the
strength, weakness, opportunity and threat factors related to the agri-tourism
development in Tekelioğlu Village and Karaburun District.

100
Map 3: Transportation map of Tekelioğlu Village and Karaburun District
Source: Table is adopted from www.karaburun.gov.tr

5.4.1. Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism Development Project

5.4.1.1. General Overview for the Manisa City and Salihli District
Tekelioğlu Village takes place in the city borders of Manisa. Manisa city takes
place in the Aegean Region of Turkey with 1.260.169 population number (DIE,
2000), 15 districts and 13.810-km² surface areas. The Aegean Region’s economic
apportionment in the entire economy of Turkey is generally based on agricultural
production.

Manisa city has Mediterranean climate characterization with annual 16,8 °C

temperature. July is the hottest month of the year with approximately 34.4 °C and
January is the coldest month of the year with approximately 3.0 °C temperature
(Data is taken from the web page of Manisa Culture and Tourism
Administration).

101
Manisa city is one of the important agricultural production areas in Turkey.
72,75% of seedless raisin, 21,45 of tobacco and 11,66% of cherry and 6.85% of
cotton production of Turkey are produced in Manisa city. Salihli, Turgutlu,
Manisa and Bakırçay plains are the agricultural lands with the higher production.
There are approximately 125 000 agricultural operator and approximately 89,5%
of this number are the small, family operations with approximately 1-25 decare
areas (Data is taken from the website of the Manisa City Agriculture
Administration).

Secondary economic tool of Manisa is the increasing alternative tourism demand.

City has the tourism development potential with its ancient, historical, cultural
and natural values. History of the city lasts to B.C. 3000 and city has the marks of
Hittite, Frigia, Lydia, Rome, Byzantine, and Ottoman civilizations.

Spil Mountain National Park, historical and natural sites and museums have
increasing tourism potential as it is seen in the Table 13 and Table 14.

Table 13: *Number of local and foreign tourists accommodated in hotels in

Manisa City

* First Half of the Year *End of the Year

Years Local Foreign Local Foreign Total
tourists tourists tourists tourists
2005 - - 117 977 6 419 124 396
2006 63 523 7 926 133 036 15 653 148 689
2007 73 918 3 361 - - -

Source: Tourism Development Strategic Plan Documents of Manisa City

Culture and Tourism Administration

102
 Table 14: * Number of local and foreign tourists visited museums and
historical sites of Manisa City

* First Half of the Year *End of the Year

Years Local Foreign Local Foreign Total
tourists tourists tourists tourists
2005 - - 16 110 50 411 66 521
2006 16 710 21 931 21 093 45 386 66 479
2007 10 676 32 548 - -
Source: Tourism Development Strategic Plan Documents of Manisa City
Culture and Tourism Administration

Another tourism products of Manisa city are the thermal resources. With the
effects of increasing thermal tourism demand, thermal facilities have the
increasing tendency.

Development of thermal tourism, cultural tourism and nature-based in Manisa are

the three key elements of Manisa City Culture and Tourism Administration’s
tourism development strategic plans.

It may be said that Manisa city has appropriate conditions for agri-tourism
development with the agricultural production, climate conditions and alternative
tourism potential. Manisa City Culture and Tourism Administration is one of the
public supporters of the rural tourism development project in Tekelioğlu Village.
However, supports are inadequate because of the non-existence of centrally
supports for agri-tourism and undetermined responsibilities of the local
administrations.

Salihli District takes place on the E96 Uşak-İzmir road and Izmir-Uşak-Afyon
railway. District has the 74 km distance to the Manisa City center and totally has
149. 151 population number (DIE, 2000). District has 1302 km² surface area and
Mediterranean climate conditions.

103
Economy of Salihli district is based on agri-cultural production, industry and
trade. Generally cotton, olive, fruit and vegetable, tobacco and seedless raisin are
produced and there are 58 fabrics of private sector in Salihli that mainly produces
agricultural products.

Salihli Chamber of Commerce has determined the development strategy of the

district as development of agriculture, tourism and trade (3T formula: Tarım-
Turizm- Ticaret). As well as the importance of the trade and agricultural
production, tourism resources of Salihli District has also the development
potential. Sardes civilization and Lydia Civilization ruins and ancient Aigai city
take place in the district. Also district has geo-thermal resources and there are
expectations for the increasing tourist numbers through the effect of four-starred
geo-thermal hotel construction in Salihli.

5.4.1.2.Tekelioğlu Village
Tekelioğlu village is one of the villages of Salihli District with 115 houses and
376 population number (DIE, 2000). Arriving to the village is providing through
the Denizli-İstanbul road by the hourly service autos from Salihli Center.
Population has decrease tendency because of the migration of approximately 3-5
young inhabitants of the village every year because of the unemployment
problems. Therefore, population is getting older.

Organic agricultural production is the main economic resource of the village since
1985 through the encouragements of a German firm. The firm is the only
marketing tool of the products.

There is 11.285 decare agricultural production area in the village and seas am,
wheat, barley and olive are mostly produced agricultural products. Table 15
demonstrates the agricultural production area amounts in Tekelioğlu Village

104
 Table 15: The agricultural production area amounts in Tekelioğlu Village

Agricultural production area of Tekelioğlu Decare

Production
Olive production area 3100 decare
Seasam , Wheat, Barley production area 6500 decare
Grape and cotton production area 550 decare
Tomato, Pepper production area 500 decare
Tobacco production area 635 decare
TOTAL AREA 11.285 decare
Source: Data is obtained from the mukhtar of the Tekelioğlu Village.

Village takes place near the Marmara Lake. The lake is the second biggest lake of
Aegean Region with 34 km² surface area. Lake is shallow and was emerged
through the volcanic formations in the Gediz plain. Connection between the
Gördes Çayı and Gediz River is obtained by the channels and by this connection
Gördes and Gediz’s excessive amount of water is collected in the Marmara Lake.
The water of the lake is used to irrigate the agricultural lands in the summer
months (Encyclopedia Britannica). Agricultural lands near the lake are productive
because of the richness of the alluvium.

Although the existence of 101 kinds of birds and the fishery potential, villagers
generally do not benefit from the lake and it is in need for maintenance because
the unconscious implementations cause to threats on the lake’s natural potential.

On the eastern side of the village there are the kings’ graves of Lydia Civilization.
Area that the graves (tumulus) take place in is historical site and the tumulus are
known as Bintepe Tumulus. Bintepe Tumulus takes place on the western side of
the Salihli plain. There are about 100 tumulus and these are one of the other
biggest examples that take place in Anatolia. Tumulus lasts to B.C. 7.Century.

105
However, although the ancient value of the tumulus there no precaution against
the robbery threats.

Photo1. Entrance of the village on the Denizli-İstanbul Road

106
Photo 2: A view from the village

Photo 3: Lydia Civilization Tumulus Photo

Source: Photo is obtained from the archieve study of Nedim ZURNACI, the
coordinator of the Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism Development Project

107
Photo 4: Marmara Lake and the agricultural production areas

Photo 5: Marmara Lake and fishery area

108
Photo 6: Marmara Lake is in need of maintenance

Table 16: Legend / Map 4

District Center Fishery and lake tourism

Villages Ancient values

Agriculture production area Cultural tourism

Mountainous- Forestry Area Natural Values

Transportation (Uşak-İzmir Road) High School

Thermal Tourism Agricultural Industry

Agri-tourism Trade

109
110

Map 4: Location Map of Salihli District and Tekelioğlu village

Source: Map is adopted from (http://www.googleearth.com)

110
Houses in Tekelioğlu village generally one decker as the identical feature of the
village, however, there are a few new buildings that do not appropriate for the
village characteristics. 92 houses of the village are used solar energy system for
heating the water. In the center area of the village there are a park area (Atatürk
Youth Park) and wedding ceremony saloon.

The primary school with its one teacher and 16 students is the only public service
of the village. The village clinic is closed for years and the only health services
that may be the villagers benefited take place in Salihli Center, that are the state
hospital and the private one.

Nowadays, villagers are in tendency for transformation from single to multi-

functional agriculture by the rural tourism activities. Villagers give support to this
development through their whole family and create a Rural Tourism Festival in
the village. Especially women desire the development of tourism in their villages
with the effects of the income results of selling handcrafts and local foods in the
Rural Tourism Festival.

Tekelioğlu Village with its agricultural production, natural and ancient features
and its environment presents appropriate conditions for rural tourism and agri-
tourism development.

5.4.1.3. A General Overview of the Project *

(* Information that is given in this section is prepared through the interviews,
which were done with the project coordinators and the agri-tourism entrepreneurs.
For the interview questions See Appendix A & B)

111
Tekelioğlu Village Rural Development Project has emerged by the initiatives of
Manisa Governor’s Office in the late 2005. All the public institutions and NGOs
were the driving forces for the projects. They considered these initiatives as tools
for development issue in Manisa’s rural areas. Tekelioğlu Village Rural
Development Project was developed as a suggestion of Manisa City Agriculture
Administration but because of the insufficient resources of local governance,
project could not take place in the Governor Office’s development program.

Then the project evolved by the efforts of volunteers and institutions with the aim
of eliciting benefits from the recreational potential of organic agricultural
production areas and from Marmara Lake that demonstrates increasing demand on
rural tourism and ascending potential for the village’s present tourist number.

Activities started with the participation of the project coordinator to the Leonardo
Programme, Ecological Agriculture and Ecotourism in Europe Education and
Implementation, with the support of Salihli Chamber of Commerce. They aimed
to have knowledge about ecotourism, integration of tourism and agriculture as
well as about the EU projects. Through the Leonardo Project, two villages of
Salihli District near the Marmara Lake, Tekelioğlu Village and Köseler Village,
were suggested to develop rural tourism. The natural and historical characteristics
and agriculture production abilities of these villages made them attractive sites for
the project.

First of all, with the help of village’s mukhtar, villagers were informed about the
project and they were asked about their opinion about tourism development in the
village. Through the residents’ approval and interest in the project,
implementations first have begun in Tekelioğlu Village in the late 2006.

Because of the importance of the consciousness of the human resources about the
project and their responsibilities, the action process has begun through
educational programs for women, men and children in the wedding ceremony

112
saloon. Villagers showed high participation in the education programs. They were
given information about the project, the possible benefits of the project on the
village and their life and also their roles and responsibilities in the process.
Education programs were continued by the educators of agricultural engineer (the
coordinator of the project) from Manisa City Agriculture Administration, tourism
teacher and handcraft teacher from Salihli Trade High School in the preparation
process of Rural Tourism Festival. Through the programs villagers learned selling
techniques to commercialize their products in a healty and profitable way. The
education programs were:

1. Local Food Culture

2. Packing up the foods
3. Handicrafts
4. The activity program of the festival

Manisa City Agriculture Administration Office organized the festival. Also

Municipality, Governor’s Office, Manisa City Tourism Administration Office and
Salihli Chamber of Commerce gave support to the project. In the preparation
process, 9 WC buildings were constructed and the primary school’s garden and
the center area of the village were organized for the festival. In the tourism week,
advertisement activities were prepared as stands, TV and radio Programs. The
festival happened in April 2007, with 250 participants coming from Manisa, İzmir
and other neighbor cities.

The third action of the project was educating the local people about the
importance of the cooperative attitude. As a result, villagers established the
Limited Tekelioğlu Village Agricultural Development Cooperative to integrate
their efforts in order to increase their revenue.
Establishment of the Rural Tourism Development Organization followed this
action with the aim of representing the village and the project in the institutional

113
context, producing the required projects, establishing the necessary relationships
especially with public institutions and advertising the project.

The four agri-tourism entrepreneurs have consciousness about the relationship

between agriculture and tourism. Two of the entrepreneurs were interviewed in
order to learn their definition of agri-tourism, reason of their interest in agri-
tourism and the source of their knowledge about agri-tourism. They were also the
participants of the TA-TU-TA Project. This project was mentioned as the first
source of information about agri-tourism. Entrepreneurs made similar definitions
that are including the terms of agricultural production, volunteer guests for
production activities, selling their products directly and accommodation services
under the local conditions of their family lives.

Nowadays while one of these entrepreneurs is organizing his house as an

accommodation facility, other one is in need for financial resources for the
innovation and accommodation activities in the house.

Essentially, Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development Project is a volunteering

project and it is organized and developed spontaneously by the effects of informal
relationships that are mainly friendships. Project coordinator plays the key role in
the management of the process. Therefore, trust of the people about the
coordinator and the project partners has an impact on development of the project.
Because project did not develop under a planning process, decisions are made in a
spontaneous manner. It was aimed to have a planning process through the
initiatives of the Rural Tourism Development Initiative.

Project financially supported by the local sponsors. In 2008, IPARD aids will be
given for the project. In this stage of the project, some infrastructure activities are
continuing by the Salihli municipality and Manisa government.

114
The institutions that act in the development process of the Tekelioğlu Village
Rural Tourism Development Project are:

• Manisa Government
• Manisa Tourism Administration
• Manisa Agriculture Administration
• Salihli Municipality
• Salihli Anatolian Trade High School
• Salihli Chamber of Commerce
• Manisa Rural Tourism Development Organization
• Tekelioğlu Cooperative
• Private Sector

The support of these institutions has gained generally through the informal
relations of the volunteers.

Table 17: Identification card of the Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development

Project

IDENTIFICATION CARD OF TEKELİOĞLU RURAL TOURISM DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT

Name of the Project Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism

Development Project
Partnerships of the Project (Action Salihli Chamber of Commerce
Mechanism) Manisa City Tourism Administration
Manisa City Agriculture Administration
Salihli Commerce High School
Rural Tourism Development and
Support Organization
Salihli Municipality
Manisa City Government

Aim of the Project Developing the socio-cultural, economic

and environmental conditions of
Tekelioğlu village

The Elements that Aim to Develop by the Organic agriculture production and

115
Table 17: Identification card of the Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Project

Project marketing of the products

Marmara Lake’s fishery and bird-
watching potential
Historical values of the village
Local handicrafts

Activities realized through the project Educational programs

Rural Tourism Festival
WC
Establishment of agricultural
development cooperative
Establishment of Rural Tourism
Development Organization

Activities that are targeting to realize through Establishment of an education center

the project Restoration of the buildings that need
maintenance
Maintenance and enhancement of
Marmara Lake to be gained recreational
possibilities
Creating picnic areas
Organic Agriculture Festival
Environmental tours by horses
Physical planning studies of the village
Facilities for bird-watching and fishery

Legislative-regulative Support Mechanism that _

the project depending on

Financial Support Mechanism Local sponsors, IPARD (in 2008)

Monitoring Mechanism Rural Tourism Development

Organization will be organized a group
for monitoring the implications
Human Resources Mechanism Tekelioğlu village people
Tourist potential of the village (year) 1500
Current numbers of the families that are 4
interested in agri-tourism
Numbers of the present agri-tourism facilities 1

Agri-tourist numbers that visited the village 2

Types of the present agri-tourism services Accommodation

116
 Table 17: Identification card of the Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Project

Types of the agri-tourism services that the Working activities in the agricultural
families planning to serve production area
Local food activities
Making handcraft activities

Photo 7: Village needs maintenance

117
Photo 8: Village drinking fountain

Photo 9: A typical village house

118
Photo 10: Kitchen of the agri-tourism pension
5.1.4.4. SWOT Analysis
Table 18: SWOT Matrix of Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Initiative
INTERNAL FACTORS STRENGHTS
1.Project Existence of the action
mechanism
Education programs for
women, men and children
Support of NGOs and local
public institution
Milk products of the
cooperative will be evaluated
as agri-tourism product
119
WEAKNESSES
Insufficient researches
and analysis before the
project starts
Lack of action plan
Some regulations were
done without of a plan
Lack of education making
people learn about
becoming a tourism
entrepreneur
Table 18: SWOT Matrix of Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Initiative
2.Project 1. Agricultural Organic Agriculture since
Area Production & 1985 in whole of the village
Marketing Agricultural production areas
are near the houses
People want to continue to
organic production
2.Natural The Marmara Lake’s fishery
Values potential
The Marmara Lake with its
101 types of birds has bird-
watching potential
The Marmara Lake with its
environment that is covered
by olive production areas,
presents a landscape beauty
Climate is appropriate for
tourism in every season of the
year
3.Historical Village is surrounded by
Values tumulus that are the graves of
the Lidia Civilization and this
presents an interesting
landscape value
Agai Ancient City in the
Köseler Village 20 km far
away from Tekelioğlu Village
Also in Salihli District there
are several historical values
from the Sardes and the Lidia
Civilization appropriate for
tour activities
Because the Lidya is the first
civilization used the money
for the first time, golden
money figure is thought to
use as the symbol of Manisa
for the advertisement
activities
4.Culture Local foods and handicrafts
120
Lack of agricultural
product that may be
evaluate as agri-tourism
product
Organic Products are only
buying by Rapunzel Firm
Organic production in the
village is only under the
encouragement of the
firm
The Marmara Lake is
neglected
Because of the hot
climate and the
insufficient irrigating
general landscape of the
village is arid and
neglected
There is no wide green
area for the recreational
activities
People do not interest on
the tourism potential of
historical values
The lack of maintenance
and restoration in
historical sites and
shortage of service
Replacement of
traditional architecture by
modern concrete
buildings
Some local ceremonies
are forgotten, such as
wedding ceremonies
Table 18: SWOT Matrix of Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Initiative
5.Village’s Village has tourism potential,
Tourist approximately 1500
Potential tourists/year, coming from
Europe
Festival leaded to visiting
approximately 250 people the
village
3. Human Resources 110 families decided to
participate to the process
Interest of the local people for
rural tourism and agri-tourism
initiative
Participation of the local
people to the education
programs for women, men
and children
People have trust on the
project, project coordinator
and the partners of the project
People want to serve tourism
service by their family
Hospitality of the local people
Positive attitude of local
people towards establishing
and maintaining cooperatives
EXTERNAL FACTORS OPPORTUNITIES
1. Project Social, economic and
environmental development
opportunity for village
Project should be an example
for the other villages
Increase in the support of
NGOs in environmental
issues
Olive production should be
the symbol element for agri-
tourism product
Adding value to the products
(olive, cotton, milk)
121
For 20 years, village did
not benefit from the
tourist potential
Lack of participation to
the decision-making
process
Low educational level of
the population
Because of the
insufficient employment
resources young people
tend to migrate
Waiting for someone or
some efforts for making
develop the project
Weak communication
between local people and
tourists due to limited
knowledge about tourism
Lack of entrepreneur sprit
in local people
THREATS
Natural and historical
values are under the
threats of non-planned
action
Non-planed development
should tend people only
tourism
Environmental problems
may occur due to misuse
and over consumption of
nature and environmental
resources by local
entrepreneurs.
Erosion
Table 18: SWOT Matrix of Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Initiative
2. Project area Village is on the Istanbul-
Salihli road
Less-sloping
Accessible
Approximately 400
inhabitants
The Ataturk Youth Park that
takes place in the village
3.Legislative/Regulative Increasing official speeches
Area and planning approaches
Manisa City Tourism
Administration have been
started several initiatives
through the alternative
tourism development
approach
4. Financial Resources EU funds
KTB financial aids for
festival organizations
Local sponsors
Local dynamics
5. Advertisement Increasing interest of media
on alternative tourism
Virtual communication on
internet (internet
opportunities)
122
Village has infrastructure
problems
Insufficient public service
sector
There is no regulation for
the rubbish, they are left
in empty areas near the
village
Decreasing amount of
irrigating water
Erosion
Changing agricultural
policies often
Lack of official,
legislative supports may
cause to decrease on the
trust of people to the
project
Lack of financial supports
may cause to decrease on
the trust of people to the
project
Exagration of the
information resources
about a non-developed
tourism facility
Disinformation of some
information about the
project
 Table 18: SWOT Matrix of Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development
Initiative

6. Tourism Potential Increasing tourist numbers of Some cultural values are

Manisa city through the
alternative tourism-thermal
profile
Increasing interest of rural
tourism in other villages of
Salihli District
Historical values- tumulus,
Sardis, Lydia and Agai
Antique City in the border of
Salihli village
Construction of four-stared
hotel may lead to tourist
increase in Salihli
Mountain Spil National Park
forgotten
Tumulus in Tekelioğlu
Village do not protecting
against vandal actions and
this cause to burglary
There is no historical
awareness and interest on
Salihli District’s
historical potential for
tourism development
Because of the
insufficient irrigating and
maintenance nature is
becoming drought
Pollution effects on
Marmara Lake

7. Human Resources Local people should have Because of the migration,

chance for socially
development
Some migrating people may
turn back to the village with
the increasing employment
and income resources
population is getting older
and this cause to decrease
on the productive effort
Loosing farmer identity

Salihli District has also another private agro-tourism facilities because of its
convenient conditions for agri-tourism development in other Villages.
Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism Development Project should act as the prior
example for these initiatives with its cooperative development model.

In the Adala Town of Salihli District, a private initiative called Attalos Farm
Tourism presents agri-tourism services to the visitors coming from generally
Manisa and İzmir. Farm presents natural life atmosphere with 15 kinds of
animals, vineyards and various fruits.

123
Farm daily provides employment opportunity for about 30-35 workers coming
from the other villages and also village products buying from the villages are
selling in the facility to the urban visitors.

This example is important with its role not only providing an economic
opportunity for its environment but also constituting an example for the farm
owners who are nowadays interested in agri-tourism.

Photo 11: At the farm organic products buying from the villages are selling to
the visitors

124
Photo 12: A view from the farm

Photo 13: A view from the farm

125
5.4.2.Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project

5.4.2.1. General overview for Karaburun District and Sarpıncık, Parlak and
Küçükbahçe Villages
Karaburun District with its 15 villages takes place in the borders of İzmir city
with 109 km distance to the city center. Karaburun Peninsula is the western point
of Turkey, at the entrance of İzmir Gulf. The Peninsula has mountainous
geography with the 180 km coastal areas (www.karaburun.gov.tr). İzmir Gulf
takes place on the eastern, Urla District takes place on the southern and the
Aegean Sea takes place on the northern and western side of the Karaburun
District.

Settlement history of the city dates back to B.C. 3000. İzmir city is located in the
western side of Anatolia and with its 3.370.866 population number (DIE, 2000) it
the biggest city of the Aegean Region and the third biggest city of Turkey. İzmir
city has 28 districts.

City economy is depended on industry, tourism and agriculture. Although the

İzmir city’s big economic potential, Karaburun District takes place on the western
side of the city with its smaller, undeveloped structure.

Total population number of Karaburun District is 13.446 (DIE, 2000). Arriving to

the peninsula from İzmir is generally providing through the İzmir-Çeşme highway
and Balçova- Gülbahçe-Karaburun Road that is on the 55.km of the highway.
There is no direct arriving service from İzmir to Karaburun. Although it has the
existence of the sea potential, there is no sea arrival service. The road of
Karaburun has difficulties for arriving Karaburun with more than 180 curves.

Climate conditions of Karaburun Peninsula have similar properties with the

Western Anatolia’s Aegean Coastal Areas. Climate has Mediterranean character

126
with hot-arid summers, rainy winters and annual average 17Cº temperature.
Because of the topographic and climatic conditions, peninsula has the dominant
southern and northeastern winds with annual average 36m/sn speed
(www.karaburunizmir.net).

Because of the mountainous character of the peninsula, agricultural production

has disadvantageous conditions for development. Geographical conditions also
effect on marketing the products negatively. Therefore, effectiveness of the
agricultural production on the peninsula’s economy is weak. However, local
people subsist on agriculture. Fishery and stock-breeding are also the agricultural
instruments of the local people.

Total agricultural production area is 3.705ha and artichoke, mandarin and olive
are the main agricultural products that are producing in the peninsula. Also the
irrigating problems cause threats for agricultural production. The only industry is
the olive oil factory in the Eğlenhoca village.

Peninsula has natural, historical and cultural values. Despite its large coastal line,
district has low amount of sandy beaches for developing the sand-sun-sea tourism.
However, Karaburun has sea-sand-sun tourism demand with the effects of its
clean, blue-flagged beaches. Generally tourists of Karaburun district are the
ownerships of the summerhouses. There are one four-star hotel, five three-star
hotels and the smaller ones in the district.

One of the most attractive features of the peninsula is its mythological and
historical past. The past of the peninsula dates back 15 million years ago
(Öztekin, 2006). In the ancient Greek mythology, Peninsula is known as the
Mimas City, which is the area of a number of stories that taken place (Öztekin,
2006). Also because of the old Greek settlements in the region, peninsula still
reflects the features of some Greek culture.

127
According to the data taken from the Karaburun local government, at the
weekends of summer months the tourist number of Karaburun is averagely 15.000
with the summerhouse owners and there are 700 beds in the district center.
Tourist number decreases in the winter months to averagely 3000 tourists.

Karaburun peninsula has advantageous conditions for various types of alternative

tourism with its geographical, natural, historical and cultural values. Therefore,
there are eco-tourism activities, trekking groups, and camping areas in the
area.Since 2005, in Sarpıncık, Parlak and Küçükbahçe villages there are also agri-
tourism facilities.

Sarpıncık village is 15 km far away from the district center and the population
number of the city is 178 (DIE, 2000). Sarpıncık village, because it is the first
village taking place on the Karaburun-Küçükbahçe road, has the easiest arriving
conditions from Karaburun center then the other villages. Because it takes place
on a hilly area, with its stone-made architecture, the settlement presents an
unusual view. Olive and narcissus flower is producing in the village and also
village has an inlet. There is no school and health unit in the village.

Parlak village takes place on the middle and the hilliest point of the Sarpıncık-
Küçükbahçe road. It has the poorest arriving and communication conditions
among the other villages. The distance between Parlak village and Karaburun
center is 22 km and the population number of the village is 184 (DIE, 2000).
Olive and vegetable is the agricultural products of the village. The village has
inlet. However arriving the inlet, as the Sarpıncık Inlet, has difficulties because of
the road and geographical conditions. There is no school and health unit in the
village.

Küçükbahçe village is the bigger one of the three villages. Although there is 33
km distance from the Karaburun Center, Küçükbahçe village has advantageous
conditions with its flat area near the sea. The population number of the village is

128
773 (DIE, 2000). Essentially, the first settlement of Küçükbahçe village takes
place on the east of present settlement. However, because of the disadvantageous
geographical conditions of the village especially for agricultural production,
village settlement has been carried to the present location that has flat agricultural
areas that are suitable for agricultural production in winter months. This condition
leads to secondary house culture in the village. In the village generally organic
winter agriculture has been done and the main agricultural products of the village
is citrus, artichoke and olive. There is no school and health unit in the village.

Table 19: Legend / Map 7

İzmir City Center Fishery

District Center Historical Values (Greek

Settlements)
Villages Ancient values

Agriculture production area Agri-tourism

Mountainous- Forestry Area Natural Values

Transportation Sea-Sand-Sun Tourism

Mountainous-Rock Areas Agricultural Industry

129
128

Map 5: Location of Karaburun District

Source: Map is adopted from <http://www.googleearth.com>

130
5.4.2.2. A General Overview of the Project

Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative is an education and employment

project that was established by a group of women in the Sarpıncık, Parlak and
Küçükbahçe Villages of Karaburun District. Through the project, women who sell
the homemade fruit jams, local foods and handcrafts established a cooperative. 7
of 15 entrepreneurs of the cooperative are serving bed & breakfast facilities in
their houses, which were innovated through the criteria of the project.

Project is emerged through Women’s Initiative for Peace Organization

(WINPEACE) that was established through the initiatives of Turkish and Greek
volunteers with the aim of enhancing friendship between Turks and Greeks.
Organization developed an agri-tourism education project for Turkish rural
women as it was developed in Petra Village of Greece. The education project that
was prepared by WINPEACE originators was submitted to EC for financing and
acceptance of the project by EC started the process in November 2004.

Karaburun District is preferred with its natural and historical structure and
Sarpıncık, Parlak and Küçükbahçe Villages were chosen according to their local
settlement forms, agricultural production, natural landscapes, historical Greek
settlements, and the enthusiasm of the women that were informed during the
interviews done with them.

After the convincing process of the women and their families, education programs
started and last for three months between March and June 2005. Education
programs were about:

• Awareness of being women

• The cooperative system

131
 • Communicating with tourists without knowing a foreign language, and
education about some services e.g. preparing a breakfast table, cleaning
the windows
• Producing in cooperation

Women are also made aware of producing local foods and fruit jams. 30 women
participated in the education programs. Then at the stage of establishing the agri-
tourism cooperative, the number decreased to 18 women because of the financial
requirements of establishing the cooperation. Today the cooperative has 15
members and seven of these members are regulated their houses for the
determined criteria that require bedrooms with bath and WC, a common kitchen
and hygiene rules. At this point, the first coordinator indicates the impropriety of
the rules that were decided in Istanbul by the members of the WINPEACE for the
villages’ conditions. Table 20 demonstrates the number of cooperative members,
accommodation units and bed numbers in Küçükbahçe, Parlak and Sarpıncık
Villages.

Table 20: Cooperative member, accommodation unit and bed numbers of

Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative

VILLAGES
KÜÇÜKBAHÇE PARLAK SARPINCIK TOTAL
NUMBERS
Cooperative 8 2 5 15
Member
Number
Accommodation 4 1 2 7
unit number
Bed Number 13 7 13 33

After establishing the cooperative and accommodation units, women had stands in
the bazaar of Karaburun and started to sell their fruit jams. Through the education
program they are also visited the Petra Village to see the example for developing

132
their knowledge about the project and women from Petra visited the three
villages. Also through the effects of the media, project was made known and
visitors started to come to villages. Internet was the most effective information
dissemination medium for becoming known. Table 21 demonstrates the number
of Turkish and foreign tourist numbers. Table 22 demonstrates tourist numbers
according to their nationalities.

Table 21: Turkish and foreign tourist numbers for three years visit the
Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project
VILLAGES KÜÇÜKBAHÇE PARLAK SARPINCIK

YEARS T* F* T F T F TOTAL
2005 8 4 7 6 9 10 44
2006 15 3 10 - 4 2 34
2007 8 1 6 - 7 2 24
TOTAL 31 8 23 6 20 14 102

Table 22: Tourists numbers according to the nationality

COUNTRIES TOURIST NUMBERS

Turkey 74
Greece 19
Italy 3
Germany 2
America 2
Spain 1
Norway 1
TOTAL 102

In the preliminary stage of the project, governor of İzmir and the mayor of
Karaburun District showed interest in the project and provided some help about
the requirements of the project. After this preparatory process and by the end of
the EC project, today Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative is working to

133
develop the project through the efforts of cooperative and the credit aims of
Karaburun local government for restoration of the houses. However, because the
villages of Karaburun project are located in the second-degree protection area,
villagers have some obstacles for restoration and renovation activities of their
houses.
The institutions that act in the development process of the Karaburun Women
Agri-tourism Initiative Project are:

• İzmir Agriculture Administration

• Karaburun Local Government
• Karaburun Municipality
• Izmir High Technology Institute
• WINPEACE Organization
• Kızılay Organization

Table 23: Identification Card of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative

Project

IDENTIFICATION CARD OF KARABURUN WOMEN AGRI-TOURISM

INITIATIVE PROJECT

Name of the Project Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative

Starting Date November 2004
Partnerships of the Project (Action WINPEACE
Mechanism)
Limited Karaburun Women Cooperative

Aim of the Project It is an education and employment for

women program for the local women

The Elements that Aim to Develop by the Natural and historical potential
Project
Local catering and handicrafts

Activities realized through the project Education programs

Establishing the women cooperative

Stands in the Karaburun Bazaar

134
Table 23: Identification Card of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative
Project

Stands in the Karaburun Festival

Pension services

Maintenance and innovations in the houses

Physical planning studies by a group of

Activities that are targeting to realize
through the project
architecture students from High
Technology Institute
Developing pension services
Direct marketing of the local products

Environmental travels to the areas that

have natural and historical values

Legislative-regulative Support Mechanism _

that the project depending on
Financial Support Mechanism Karaburun Local Government
Monitoring Mechanism _

Human Resources Mechanism Küçükbahçe, Parlak and Sarpıncık

Villages Women
Tourist potential of the villages _
Current numbers of the women that are 15
interested in agri-tourism
Numbers of the present agri-tourism facilities 7

Numbers of the present bed numbers 33

Agri-tourist numbers that visited the village 102

(for three years)
Types of the present agri-tourism services Bed & Breakfast
Types of the agri-tourism services that the
families planning to serve Bed & Breakfast

Volunteer participation to the agricultural

production activities

Selling the products directly

135
5.4.2.3.SWOT Analysis

Table 24: SWOT Matrix of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project

INTERNAL FACTORS STRENGHTS WEAKNESSES

1.Project Existence of the action Because decisions about

mechanism the project were made in
Being a women Istanbul by the members
employment project of WINPEACE
Established by NGO Organization some of
initiative them were not
Being cooperative appropriate for the
initiative people’s lifestyles
Education programs are It tries to develop in a
realized by the non-planned process
participation of the No serious analysis
experts studies were done
Physical planning studies
do not implement
because of the lack of
interest and financial
resources
Accommodation units are
in need to maintenance
Cooperative has no
appropriate facility for
advertisement and selling
products
2.Project 1. Organic vegetable and Agricultural lands are far
Area Agricultural fruit production away from the
Production & Olive production accommodation units
Marketing Fruit jam production Marketing is providing
by merchants coming
villages
People can not market
their products directly
No initiative for adding
value to agricultural
products

136
Table 24: SWOT Matrix of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project

2.Natural Mountainous geography Damage on the water

Values has dominant landscape resources
value
Aegean climate is
appropriate for agri-
tourism for all months of
the year
Each village has its inlet
with clean sea and clean
air conditions
Wind
Healing plants
Ornamental plants

3.Historical Existence of the Historical buildings are in

Values historical Greek need to maintenance
settlements on the road Because the area is
among the villages historical site people can
Mythological past of not innovate their houses
Karaburun District

4.Culture Aegean Culture People cannot accept

Folkloric traditions money from the tourists
Because the area is because of their
historical site, local hospitality traditions
settlement characteristics Settlements do not have
is protected close relations
Local catering properties
are still continuing

5.Village’s Tourists having interest Rarely, tours are

Tourist on local cultures and organized to see the
Potential natural conditions are natural and historical
interested in the project values by some tour
operators

137
Table 24: SWOT Matrix of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project

3. Human Resources Education programs Low level of education

provide a conscious on No initiative behavior
not only women but also Because of the
whole family members insufficient employment
about tourism resources young people
Women want the tend to migrate
continuation of the Women have conscious
project about the relationship
People are accustomed between agricultural
to tourists because of the production and agri-
tourism potential of tourism
Karaburun District
Hospitality of the people

EXTERNAL FACTORS OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

1. Project Project should be Lack of planning

evaluate as the pilot Lack of effective
project management
Because the region is People tend to loose their
appropriate for other trust on the project and
alternative tourism forms the coordinator
as trekking, surf, they Men of the families do
should be evaluate in an not allow for every
integrative approach tourists (marriage is
Olive oil factory in the important for them)
Eğlenhoca village of
Karaburun

2. Villages Sarpıncık Village is Villages are generally

close to the Center of poor because of their
Karaburun District economy depended on
Küçükbahçe District has agriculture
advantageous conditions Parlak and Küçükbahçe
through the winter villages are far away
agriculture from the center of
Geographical conditions Karaburun District
of Küçükbahçe Village Parlak Village is the
is not have mountainous poorest and
character disadvantageous village
Küçükbahçe village is with the geographical,
close to sea communicational
Arriving conditions to (telephone, road) and the
peninsula should be public services
improve by the sea Road needs maintenance
services There is no facility on the
road among the villages;

138
Table 24: SWOT Matrix of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project

3.Legislative/Regulative Increasing official Changing agricultural

Area speeches and planning policies
approaches Lack of official,
legislative supports cause
to decrease on the trust of
people to the project
4. Financial Resources EU Funds Some people do not
evaluate the credits given
by the Karaburun local
government through the
given reasons
Awareness of the EU
funds is low

5. Advertisement Internet resources, and Exagration of the

media should continue to information resources
be effective for the about a non-developed
advertisement of the tourism facility
project as it was done in Disinformation of some
the establishment information about the
process of project project
Becoming a LEADER-
MED Project

6. Tourism Potential Karaburun District’s Because the agricultural

tourism potential lands are far way from
Karaburun Festival in the villages, insufficient
every first weekend of productive efforts and
September in Karaburun reluctant people for the
District agricultural production,
Fishery is desired to on-planned increasing
develop by local people tourism potential may
Olive and olive oil cause to damage on the
products should be the agricultural production
agri-tourism product of and sustainability of the
the project lands
Increasing interest on the Karaburun road with 183
historical settlements in curves
the world
Foreign tourists are
interested in the project

139
Table 24: SWOT Matrix of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative Project

7. Human Resources Local people should People do not have

have chance for socially conscious about their
development rights and financial
Some migrating young resources
people may turn back to Women have some
their villages with the disagreements
increasing employment Some women do not
and income resources behave according to the
rules of the cooperative
Loosing farmer identity

5.5. Results & Discussions

Evaluation of the Tekelioğlu Rural Tourism Development and Karaburun Women
Agri-tourism Initiative projects demonstrated similar results not only for local
level planning actions but also for upper level planning studies. While the
interviews with agri-tourism entrepreneurs and observations generally
demonstrated the factors that have to be paid attention for the local level action
plans, other interviews shed light on especially the underlying factors of the
upper-level agri-tourism development in Turkey.

The four villages that were visited for the case study generally demonstrate the
conditions of rural areas in Turkey that are submitted in National Rural
Development Strategy Report, given in Table 11.

In the Table 23, the comparison of the two villages is given on the basis of the
current conditions of agri-tourism development projects according to the needed
features of agri-tourism sector in order to understand the general conditions for
Turkey. List was prepared under the data obtained through the case study and
reviewing the literature.

140
Table 25: Comparation between the two projects for evaluating the
factors that may effect on agri-tourism planning studies in Turkey

CRITERIA/ Tekelioğlu Rural Karaburun Women

DIFFERENCES Development Project Agri-tourism Initiative

Aim of the projects Developing the socio- Education and

cultural, economic and employment for women
environmental
conditions of
Tekelioğlu village
Linking tourism with Medium Weak
agriculture

Participant to Project High- Family Lower- Women

Disadvantages of agri-tourism Low Higher

Coordination between same Medium Low

level of administrations
Cooperative behaviour Strong Lower

Financing mechanism EU-IPARD Program Karaburun Local

Local Sponsors Government and the
revenue of the
cooperative
Monitoring Mechanism - -

Action Mechanism Strong Weak

Agricultural production Medium Low

Accessibility Medium Lower

CRITERIA/ Tekelioğlu Rural Karaburun Women Agri-

SIMILARITIES Development Project tourism Initiative

Size of agri-tourism farms Small Small

Tradition of rural tourism - -

Bottom-up approach Strong Strong

Regional Image Weak Weak

Diversification opportunity in High High

tourism product

141
 Table 25: Comparation between the two projects for evaluating the
factors that may effect on agri-tourism planning studies in Turkey

Share of agricultural tourism Low Low

in overall tourism sector

Legislative-Regulative - -
Mechanism

Human Resources Mechanism Medium Medium

Location Appropriate for agri- Appropriate for agri-

tourism development tourism development
Tourism Potential Medium Medium

Planning studies Low Low

Farm scale Small Small

Agri-tourism product - -

The strengths of the projects generally depend on the natural, cultural and the
agricultural values of the villages and the cooperative behavior of the people.
However, weaknesses of the two projects are generally based on the economic
and educational conditions of the farmers. Tekelioğlu, Küçükbahçe, Parlak and
Sarpıncık villages’ inhabitants are in tendency to transform from single to
multifunctional agricultural production by their own initiatives because of the
necessities for new income resources.

The main features are reviewed which are the aim of the project, agri-tourism
product, agri-tourism development area and the disadvantages of agri-tourism that
are the necessities for the achievement of an agri-tourism plan. It is found that the
projects occurred under economic development purpose, and the villages are
appropriate for the agri-tourism development with the location conditions.
However, lack of planning has an impact on the other criteria. In Karaburun
Project home-pension operations may be evaluated as the agri-tourism product but
the conditions of the buildings do not have enough agri-tourism facility conditions

142
for serving accommodation facility. Olive production has an opportunity for
evaluating as the agri-tourism product in Tekelioğlu Village. On the other side
there is still no precautions against the disadvantages and the threats of the agri-
tourism development.

Tourism potential of Manisa and İzmir city and the agricultural structure of the
villages present the main opportunities for the agri-tourism development. It may
be said that the awareness of the people about making their agricultural
production multifunctional and the agri-tourism potential of the villages present
the most important opportunities for the projects.

In Salihli District, not only in Tekelioğlu Village but also in other ones, because
of the interaction among the villages, there is an increasing interest on agri-
tourism initiatives. Tekelioğlu Village Rural Tourism Development Project is the
first one and therefore it has the role of being example for the other villages by its
cooperative manner, if it may be achieved.
Nowadays, Tekelioğlu project is in constructing level with the pursuit of physical
planning activities and financial resources for the development of the project.
Although there are 4 agri-tourism entrepreneurs, 15 farmers indicated their
interest in agri-tourism and it is seen that they are in need and curiosity to see the
results of the present enterprises to decide for being an agri-tourism entrepreneur.
Karaburun project is in more developed structure with 7 accommodation units, 33
bed numbers and 15 employed women. However, low amount of tourists reflects
the results of insufficient interests of public institutions and advertisements;
Karaburun entrepreneurs have credit debt taken for the innovation in their houses
and they have disappointment because of the current position of the project that
they have not expected.

Generally it may be said that inhabitants of the villages are in relation with urban
areas and all the villagers tend to have more modern living conditions in their
villages. Especially, large amount of Karaburun villagers have secondary houses

143
in Karaburun center or İzmir. Because of unproductiveness and low income,
people are not pleased with agricultural production and they tend to have new
income resources. This causes migration of young people. Villagers mention that
young generation of their villages with low-level education has unemployment
problems in the urban areas.

Although Tekelioğlu people have more advantageous conditions with the

encouragement of Rapunzel Firm for their organic products, migrating problem is
one of the most crucial one for the Tekelioğlu, too. However, organic production
and the guarantee income resources providing by Rapunzel firm, make the
Tekelioğlu villagers more pleased with agricultural production and they are in
desire of continuing the organic agriculture with the demand for new income
resources such as new markets. So, agri-tourism and rural tourism development
idea was accepted by the villagers under these conditions and nowadays in
Tekelioğlu village, similar excitements, desires and hopes are seen as in the first
stages of the Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative.

Agri-tourism entrepreneurs’ answers for the question about the definition of agri-
tourism concept demonstrate the conscious on the relationship between
agriculture and tourism. All of the entrepreneurs used the terms of agricultural
production, volunteer guests, selling their products directly to the tourists and
accommodation services under the local conditions of their family lives. Tourism
attractions that they plan to serve are various as milking and stockbreeding,
making various jams, pick your own, bed & breakfast facilities. Despite the
existence of this consciousness, people still do not have further vision about the
possible conditions of the villages and their lives when the tourism gets
developed.

Karaburun women have learned agri-tourism firstly by the WINPEACE education

project and Tekelioğlu entrepreneurs said that they were learned about it by TA-
TU-TA project, when the members of the Bugday Organization come to the

144
village with the aim of introducing their project. It demonstrates the effectiveness
of NGOs and education programs on developing consciousness.

It is seen that, villagers’ interests of becoming a tourism entrepreneur are formed

through the projects. While Tekelioğlu agri-tourism entrepreneurs answered the
question as promoting their village and having new markets for selling their
organic products, Karaburun women reply the question as earning their own
money and having a job because it is a women education project. None of the
Karaburun entrepreneurs said about the environmental protection dimension of
agri-tourism or development of their village. It may be generally said that,
because it is a women education and employment project, Karaburun villagers’
approach for the project reflect their own financial problems; they do not have a
visible interest on the development of the village. Being a women project and the
little amount of participators make the project generally distinct from the villages’
general socio-economic conditions.

However, Tekelioğlu villagers’ answers about rural tourism development project

reflect their consciousness about village development that will positively effect
their family development. The answers of the question about the reason of being
members of TA-TU-TA project were ‘having new income resources’ and this
situation also demonstrates the importance of the cooperative action.

Another question about the target tourist profile exposes the effect of local ethic
structure and the dominance of the men in both two examples. Entrepreneurs were
asked if they welcome every kind of tourists. Tekelioğlu entrepreneurs directly
said that they do not want to accommodate single men and non-married couples
because of their family lives. This answer was also given by Karaburun women
through the explanation of not allowing by the men of their families (husbands,
father-in-law and sons). Only one woman indicates that she does not want, but
generally women do not emphasize the marital status and gender of the tourists.
This condition underlies the necessity of analyzing the acceptations of local

145
people and determining the target groups of the project. Another impression is
that, although being a women project, pleasure of the men generally plays one of
the indicative roles on the process.

Another impression is that education programs are the most effective studies of
both two projects. Villagers indicate the importance of the education programs
that they had; Tekelioğlu farmers emphasize the necessity of new education
programs; indicate their necessity about being tourism entrepreneurs. About this
issue, Karaburun project has more developed conditions because of the effects of
the education programs about being tourism enterprisers. However, in both
villages, people said that they face difficulties to establishing economic relations
with tourists because of Turkish hospitality customs. They mention about the
tourists as ‘our guests’; they did not like the term ‘commercial guest’ when they
are said. It is seen that conflict between farmer identity and being tourism-
entrepreneur has to be solved by the education programs.

The four villages have various natural, ancient, historical, cultural and agricultural
resources that should be evaluate as tourism products. The agricultural and
tourism potential and the warm climate conditions of Aegean Region are
appropriate for agri-tourism in every month of the year. Therefore, agri-tourism as
being appropriate for every season of the year should be evaluated as an
opportunity for these projects.

However, these opportunities are also under the threats of non-planned tourism
development. Although it is more developed, Karaburun project’s strengths and
opportunities are not benefited for agri-tourism development. Being a women
project may be one of the reasons of this situation and nowadays project is in need
to be known. Therefore, through the directories of the İzmir Agriculture
Administration; Karaburun Project got a member of Leader-MED Project to get
advertisement of the initiative under the logo of Leader-MED. Leader-MED
Project is an Italian Initiative and contains the small-scale Mediterranean projects

146
that aim to develop the local conditions of rural areas and these small scale
projects includes the aim of developing agro-tourism, ecotourism, agricultural
production, employment to sustain the Mediterranean characteristics.

It is decided to make the advertisements of Tekelioğlu project through the NGO

supports in a rural tourism magazine. Also because the 250 participants of rural
tourism festival pleased the people and the partnerships of the project, they are in
preparation process of the second festival, organic agriculture festival, in the
village. Manisa City Tourism Administration is the regulative institution of the
festivals through the supports of KTB for the festivals. However, tourism
administrator indicates the activities of the festivals that not reflecting the local
features of the villages. It is indicated the need of a well-organized festivals and
their importance on the advertisement of the projects.

It is understood that the festivals may be evaluated as one of the important

promoter instruments of the projects especially for their closer environments.
Making know the festivals by the whole country requires comprehensive
promotion activities with the supports of KTB. This issue relates the upper level
of planning activities.

Another impression about the interviews with the local people and coordinators is
the financial requirements of the projects. Tekelioğlu project’s financial
requirements are decided to solve by EU IPARD funds. With the effect of project
coordinators’ knowledge about benefiting from EU funds, people have the trust of
solving the infrastructure and superstructure problems of the village. Coordinator
indicates the necessity of physical planning studies of the village and they are in a
pursuit of a planning project and looking for the ways of establishing relation with
the related departments of the universities. However, although in Karaburun,
physical projects of the villages are prepared by the İzmir High Technology
University in the preparation process of the project, they could not applied
because of the financial deficiency.

147
The results of analyzing the internal and external factors that effect on the
development of these two projects demonstrate the necessity of planning projects
to achieve the targeting aims. Impressions reveal the relationship between the
satisfaction of the people and development of the projects. Satisfaction of the
entrepreneurs is necessary for the future of the project; because agri-tourism can
be develop through the human resources mechanism. At this level, while
Tekelioğlu farmers have expectations about the future of the project as it was in
the starting level of Karaburun project, Karaburun women are more hopeless
because of the disinterestedness of the related public institutions with their
projects and the low amount of tourist numbers. Because they do not have the
required infrastructure about this tourism form, the economic deficiencies and
public institutions they are more abstainer and the members of cooperative has
been decreased from 18 to 15 members.

In Tekelioğlu Village, because it is under development stage, project still has not
provided employment or income. In Karaburun 15 women are producing and
selling their products and earning income. Although they are not pleased with the
income amounts related to pensions, the number of sold jams is increased from
500 jars in 2005 to 1500 jars in 2006.

148
Photo 14: Sarpıncık Village

Photo 15: Pension in the Sarpıncık Village

149
Photo 16: Historical stone-made buildings need maintenance

Photo 17: Sarpıncık Inlet and Sarpıncık Lighthouse

150
Photo 18: Parlak Village

Photo 19: Stone-made buildings on the road between Sarpıncık and Parlak
Villages

151
Photo 20: Agri-tourism pension in the Parlak Village

Photo 21: Historical Greek settlement on the road between Parlak and
Küçükbahçe Villages

152
Photo 22: Old settlement of Küçükbahçe village

Photo 23: Agri-tourism pension in Küçükbahçe Village

153
Photo 24: Fruit jams of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Cooperative

Photo 24: Handcrafts of Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Cooperative

154
 CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION

6.1. Findings
In this thesis study, agri-tourism planning concept is examined. First of all it is
seen that, agri-tourism concept has been developed as a sub-sector of rural
tourism both in the developed and developing countries through the necessity of
sustainable development. Agri-tourism evolves through its local development
approach based on conservative manner. Because nowadays rural development
issue is one of the most important problem of the countries for increasing the un-
balanced economies between urban and rural geographies, agri-tourism gains an
attractive role with its structure that is depend on local dynamics. Sector submits
development possibilities through the own sources of a region and constitutes a
new communicative area between urban and rural people. Agri-tourism concept
was developed as a rural development instrument through the increasing tourism
demands of urban people on the rural areas and generally organic life conditions.
However, on the other side, the migration tendency of rural people from rural
areas to urban areas is continuing.

Sector should be evaluated as an integrated part of general tourism development

policies or rural development policies of a country. At this point it is vital to
distinguish the relation between the rural development and tourism development
because the agri-tourism sector service for the rural development on the side of
becoming varied of tourism sector of a country.

Generally agri-tourism is being evaluated as a part of the general tourism plans

that are part of the entire development strategies of countries.

155
Rural tourism concept as a development strategy was developed at the
intersection of these two tendencies through the parallel approach of alternative
tourism as an alternative to mass tourism. In the course of time, rural tourism
activities diversified according to the type of the activities and the areas that the
activity takes place in.

Today, for many developed countries, environmental problems entail great efforts
for protecting the natural resources. Hence, for the following years these
conditions have presented necessities for new tourism and recreation approaches
(Sağcan, 1986).

Agri-tourism concept is developed as a distinct formation with its main

characteristics of tourism activities in the farms and in the agricultural lands.
Agri-tourism is a form of tourism to market the farm life and farm products as
tourism products. This concept is developed by planners to provide new social,
cultural and economic opportunities for farmers while providing alternative
education and recreation facilities for urban people.

At the other side of the approach, term is developed for protecting the agricultural
production and agricultural lands against the attractiveness of economic power of
tourism activities. Because, increasing tourism demands on the rural areas may
cause transformations on the agricultural lands and natural resources through non-
agricultural activities. Therefore, these damages emphasize the necessity of
planning agri-tourism activities.

This study showed that agri-tourism plans are formed through three main
questions:

• What is the aim of the agri-tourism activity?

• Where should be agri-tourism developed?
• How should be agri-tourism developed?

156
The answer of the first question determines the targets of the action. As it is
reviewed in this study through the EU and Turkey examples, agri-tourism is
generally utilized as a rural development instrument and it is planned through the
national rural development or regional development plans. Also it is seen that the
agri-tourism facilities should aim the tourism development or agricultural
development. It is the multi-functional agriculture approach of productivist
agricultural production as the emerging point of the agri-tourism sector, providing
alternative income resources to the farmers. So, agri-tourism is also occurred as a
new type of agricultural production.

The answer of the second question demonstrates that, it is suggested to develop in

disadvantageous agricultural lands such as marginal lands, small-scale farms and
mountainous areas that have less competition possibilities against the advantaged
ones. Agri-tourism facilities are suggested as complementary instruments for
agricultural production and generally they are not developed as the primary
activity of the farmers because of the sustainability of the agricultural production.
However, this situation is generally valid for the agri-tourism facilities that aim
the agricultural development. Especially in the developed countries such as Italy,
the importance of the negative effects of tourism on agricultural lands is
emphasized through the laws.

Another important criterion for the agri-tourism development areas is the distance
between the agri-tourism facilities and urban areas. Generally agri-tourism
activities tend to develop in closer agricultural areas to urban areas. Additionally,
agri-tourism develops in the agricultural areas that have tourism potential in their
closer environment.

Agricultural, rural and tourism policies of a country are the main determiners of
development form of agri-tourism facilities. Administrative structure of the
country also plays role in the development of the sector.

157
Especially in the developed countries, agri-tourism sector is developed through a
system that has mechanisms making it working and the five mechanisms of agri-
tourism development process, legislative-regulative support mechanism,
monitoring mechanism, financial support mechanism, action mechanism and
human resources mechanism, constitute the framework of the system.

Essentially, agri-tourism is a form of tourism that is founded upon local dynamics.

Therefore, a well-working system from bottom to up or up to bottom is one of the
most needed elements for the agri-tourism development process.

However, it is seen that bottom-up approaches are more successful for agri-
tourism development because of the cooperative and local structure of this
tourism form. It is also seen that, local people attitudes, cultures, desires and
expectations play a crucial role on the development of the sector. Therefore, a
planning study containing the local people participation should provide
achievement for the process.

As it is seen in the results of reviewing the Italian and Polish examples, the most
determiner of the agri-tourism development process is the quality of the human
resources mechanism of the agri-tourism development process. Therefore,
organizing the process according to the local dynamics of the development area
and improving the local conditions is required.

It is found that, nowadays, at the local levels, primary constitutions of agri-

tourism are occurring in the non-industrial agricultural production areas in
Turkey. These constitutions demonstrate the necessity and desires for multi-
functional agricultural production of small-scale agriculture producers. Increasing
amounts of roadside stands and organic product sales also demonstrate this new
tendency in Turkey.

158
Although the existence of decrease in population number of rural areas, 35% of
entire population of Turkey is living in the rural areas (www.tuik.gov.tr). The new
agri-tourism tendency should be evaluated as an alternative income instrument in
Turkey, as it is declared in the Ninth Five-Year National Development Plan of
Turkey.

It is seen that, rural tourism and agri-tourism development issues are still not in
the control of the Turkish national government. Although, this situation leads to
non-planned activities, on the other side it presents free conditions for the
agriculture producers who are interested in agri-tourism and rural tourism. It is
found that the lack of legislative responsibilities such as taxation, are making the
farmers more desirous for agri-tourism initiative.

The two case studies from Turkey demonstrate the necessity for guiding of rural
people and the sensitivity of NGOs about the issue. However, although the local
administrations are in tendency to support the rural people’s initiatives, deficient
resources and underdetermined responsibilities of the administrative institutions
cause problems for developing the initiatives. Lack of coordination among the
administrations is one of the main complaints of the agri-tourism project
coordinators.

On the other hand, lack of the spirit of entrepreneurship of local people is the
common impression of the two cases. People are in tendency to protect their own
supplies and do not want to take risk. Also because of the effects of not having
experience of being tourism operators, people do not participate to the
development issues of the project; only prefer to do the what they are said.

It should be evaluate that, tendency of the people that they do not interest on some
other issues related with the project and the village. This situation shows the
importance of the necessity of the conscious for working together for a common
project.

159
It should be said that, especially in Karaburun project, for the future of the project
people are generally expect from official institutions and coordinators to help
them. People have expectations for interventions and supports, as WINPEACE
had been given at the beginning of the project.

However, it is seen that, there is an improvement on the consciousness of rural

people about the necessity of education and multi-functional farming. Rural
people demonstrate their desire of being owners of their operation. At this point
NGOs play a vital role on this condition and it is foreseen by the writer that
providing the required education and finance supports should lead the
development of agri-tourism as a sub-sector of tourism in Turkey.

Another important finding of the projects is exposing the women factor.

Development of both two projects depends on the women factor. Women are the
indispensable operators of the projects because of their effects on the rural life
and rural economy. Therefore agri-tourism depends on the existence of the
women on the process. However as it is clearly seen in Karaburun project,
achieving the implementation of agri-tourism or rural tourism in a village requires
the participation and support of men because of Turkish traditional rural life style.

6.2. Suggestions
In Turkey, the current sea-sand-sun tourism sector is constituted through the state
interventions and encouragements in 1980s. These supports were the majorfactors
for establishing the sector. Nowadays, the pursuit for diversifying the tourism
sector and the terms of alternative tourism, ecotourism, thermal tourism, mountain
tourism, congress tourism are more frequentlu used. Also time organic
agriculture, organic life styles and products attract more consumers in Turkey.

160
As being parallel to the sustainable tourism development approach; having a
tourism sector that operates twelve months of a year diversifying the sector is also
gaining more attention in the tourism politics area. On the other hand, Turkey’s
participation process to the EU requires serious rural development operations. As
it is declared in the official area, Turkey has to be produced new development
instruments for its rural regions and tourism in rural areas should be evaluated as a
new sector in Turkey. Also as the complementary tool to the agricultural
production farmers should be able to benefit from tourism. However, the
relationship between rural development and rural tourism is still not determined
sufficiently in Turkish rural development programs.

Development of general sustainable tourism sector depends on several criteria

listed below (www.tursab.org.tr):

• Variation of natural, historical and cultural tourism supplies of a country

• Geographical and climatic conditions that are appropriate for various
tourism facilities
• Well-developed NGOs and trade unions
• Strong local administrations
• Well-developed and specified advertisement and marketing methods
• Success on creating supply of tourism

Although the increasing demands for alternative tourism in Turkey, there is still
no determined national policy for alternative tourism development that should
directly adress the development of agri-tourism sector.

This thesis exposes three main points related with agri-tourism and rural
development in Turkey:

• Rural people whose economy is dependent on non-intensive agricultural

production in Turkey are in need and desire of multifunctional agriculture

161
 • These people are looking for new markets and marketing types of their
not only agricultural but also traditional products such as handcrafts, local
life styles
• Turkish national rural development approach demonstrates the potential
of agri-tourism for development in rural areas

It is seen that, current position indicates the necessity for multi-functional farming
and appropriate conditions for agri-tourism development in Turkey. These
positive conditions for agri-tourism development can be listed as:

• Appropriate geographical and climatic conditions of Turkey

• Strong natural, historical and cultural conditions of Turkey
• Developed conscious of local people on multi-functional farming
• Richness of traditional life features
• Support of NGOs and trade unions on the development of alternative
tourism

Disadvantages of agri-tourism development in Turkey can be listed as:

• Lack of national policies for development of alternative tourism

• Lack of legislative orders
• Uneducated rural people who do not have spirit for investment under poor
economic and social conditions
• Lack of planning studies

Generally, it should be accepted that agri-tourism development is based on four

related groups that are the public sector, private sector, NGOs and the local
people. These four actors are the complementary elements of the system by
supporting each other through the cooperative studies of these groups to achieve
five main planning mechanisms examined in this study. The public institutions

162
that take role on the agri-tourism development process are the ministries, local
administrative institutions and universities. These institutions should generally
share the responsibility of planning and the education issues.

First of all, it requires determining the administrative institution that has the
responsibility for the development of the sector. This process is dependent on the
aim of benefiting from agri-tourism in Turkey. As it is declared in the Ninth Five-
Year Development Plan, development strategies of Turkey aim to benefit from
agri-tourism as a rural development instrument. However, Turkish rural
development policies should have the aim of benefiting from agri-tourism as
agricultural development or tourism development. This criterion should be the
determinant of the formation of agri-tourism facilities in Turkey.

Administrative institutions should provide the required solutions for planning the
sector, determining the roles of local administrators, supporting the participation
of the people, providing financial supports and monitoring of the process.

Turkish administrative and legislative area has to be reorganized according to the

agri-tourism development. This organization should be included the legislative
determination of the concept, aims and implementation areas of the sector.
Determination of the term should eliminate the confusion between what agri-
tourism and rural tourism is.

As it is declared in the Ninth Five-Year National Development Plan Rural

Development Policies Special Expertise Sub-Commission Report, agri-tourism
sector should be developed by the TKB administration. However, because it is a
tourism activity, coordination between KTB and TKB is also necessary for the
sector development.

To encourage the farmers for multi-functional farming through the agri-tourism

development, pilot project implementations should act as prior examples as it is

163
seen in the Polish example. In Turkey, pilot projects should be implemented
through the supports and encouragements of the national government.

For ascertaining the pilot projects implementation areas, social, economic and
cultural analyses are required to ascertain the appropriate areas and conditions for
agri-tourism development in Turkey. As it is seen in Tekelioğlu Village Rural
Tourism Development Project and Karaburun Women Agri-tourism Initiative
Projects, especially cultural and traditional features of local societies play a
determining role on the tourism development process. Therefore, because agri-
tourism operations are the family operations, determining the local conditions and
the target groups should play a vital role for the sustainability of the sector.

Accordingly, through the necessity of legislative-regulative mechanism, related

laws should be legislated by the responsible ministries. Laws and regulations
related to agri-tourism development should be determined:

• What is to be done to make agri-tourism distinct from the other rural

tourism activities?
• Who is agri-tourism operator and who determines the rights and
responsibilities of the agri-tourism operator?
• Where or what kind of areas should agri-tourism activities be developed
on?
• What are the basic features of an agri-tourism facility?

In Turkey it is not appropriate for suggesting about a bottom-up approach as it is

discussed in European examples. Although the current developments in Turkey
indicate a bottom-up initiative, developing agri-tourism as a sector in Turkey,
national intervention should be required. However current initiatives should be
evaluated as the pilot projects through the supports of the responsible ministry.

164
Encouragements and supports are the determiner factors of the sector’s
development. Responsible ministry and its organizations and regulations should
play the vital role on encouragements for the farmers. Because educational and
financial issues are the mostly required necessities of farmers, public sector
should provide basic financial and educational necessities for farmers.

Agri-tourism facilities have opportunities not only for tourism funds but also for
agriculture and rural development funds in Turkey and Europe. The Program of
Supporting the Rural Development Investments of KTB is one of the financial
supporting programs. This program was developed under the framework of 2006-
2010 National Agricultural Strategy and it aims financially encouraging the
investments that are realized by the farmers’ own capital. It is supported through
EU and aims to increase the investments in rural areas.

For about the financial support mechanism that is required for agri-tourism
development in Turkey, it is important to evaluate that:

• Because of the repayment obligations, farmers do not want to take loans

Although they indicate the financial problems for the operation, they also
indicate the risks of investment on loan because of the deficient financial
support mechanism
• Although the farmers know about the EU funds, they do not have enough
skills for making an application for a fund because of the deficient human
resources mechanism
• Some people prefer to use the loans for other issues because of the deficient
monitoring mechanism

As it is seen in the European cases, especially universities play a crucial role on

the education of rural people. Courses that have the aim of such as improving the
knowledge of people about tourism sector, marketing their products, the features
of being a tourism operator and also creating information offices that are the

165
informative units about such as agriculture, agri-tourism, official issues are the
required units of a developing agri-tourism sector. Educational programs should
help providing the constitution of consciousness about importance of local
people’s participation to the process.

At this point NGOs, especially the farmer unions and agricultural cooperatives
and also the trade unions play active role in representing the farmers and their
desires and rights. Because agri-tourism sector develops as parallel to the quality
of human resources mechanism, sector requires well-educated farmers about the
sector and pre-determined rights and opportunities. Agri-tourism development
should submit a vital development opportunity for rural women in Turkey.
Improving the social conditions, economic and educational conditions of rural
women should bring benefits of rural society for the long-term rural development
studies in Turkey.

Private sector plays the marketing and advertising force of the sector. Cooperation
between the farmers and the private sector should create opportunities for new
markets. As it is seen in the Tekelioğlu example, private sector plays the
formative role for organic agriculture and marketing role for organic products of
the village. On the other hand network of the firm provides a serious number of
tourist potential to the village.

To sum up, essentially the five planning mechanisms reviewed and presented in
this study, demonstrate the relationship between cooperative tourism planning
approach and agri-tourism development. The main problem of Turkey for the
development of the sector may be deemed as the lack of cooperation among
government agencies. Cooperation between government agencies, different levels
of governments, equally autonomous polities at various administrative levels and
the private and public sector and NGOs should establish the agri-tourism sector in
Turkey through the positive effects of the desires and initiatives of Turkish
farmers.

166
 REFERENCES

Agriculture and Food Economy in Poland, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development Publish, Warsaw, 2004

Akın, Acuner, Ş., Alternatif Turizm Türlerinin Doğu Karadeniz Bölgesi Turizm
Potansiyelinin Gelişmesine Etkisi, Milli Prodüktivite Merkezi Yayınları, No:689,
Ankara, 2006

Akpınar, N., Talay, İ., Ceylan, C., Gündüz, S., Rural Women and Agrotourism in
the Context of Sustainable Rural Development: A Case Study From Turkey,
Kluwer Journal 6, Pages 473-486, 2004

Aksoy, E., Uslu, K., Özkan, M., Kova, S., Kırsal Kalkınma Faaliyetleri ve
Projeler, Türktarım Tarım ve Köy İşleri Bakanlığı Dergisi, No 173, Pages 15-21,
2007

Altıncı Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı (1990-1994), DPT, Ankara, 1990.

<http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/plan/plan6.pdf>, Last visited on 26.01.2007

American Farm Bureau Federation Web Page, 2004 Annual Meeting Highlights,
2004. <http://www.fb.org>, Last visited on 22.01.2004

Arat, N., Kadın Sorunu, Say Yayınları, İstanbul, 1986

Ataer, M.U., Erdemli, S., Varışlı, A., Turizm Sektörüne Sağlanan Devlet
Yardımları, Hazine Dergisi, Sayı 16, 2003,
<http://www.hazine.gov.tr/makaleler/tesvik.pdf>, Last visited on 23.04.2007

Atik, M., Altan, T., Artar, M., Turizm ve Doğa Koruma “Güney Antalya
Bölgesi”: Gelişmeler ve Sonuçları, Akdeniz Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi,

167
19(2), Sayfa 165-177, 2006. <http://www.akdeniz.edu.tr/ziraat/zfd/article/19_02-
02.pdf>, Last visited on 03.03. 2007.

Augustyn, A., National Strategies for Rural Tourism Development and

Sustainability: The Polish Experience, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol 6, No
3, Pages 191-209, 1998

Bañski, J., Stola, W., Transformation of the Spatial and Functional Structure of
Rural Areas in Poland, Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Geography and
Spatial Organization Staff Publications, 2002.
<http://www.igipz.pan.pl/zpz/banski/PDF/8.pdf>, Last visited on 27.10.2006

Bayraç, H. N., Yenilmez, F., Tarım Sektörünün Yapısal Analizi ve Ortak Tarım
Politikası, Demokrasi Platformu Dergisi, No:3, Orient Yayınları, 2005

Berber, M., Çelepçi, E., Türk Bölgesel Kalkınma Politikalarında Yeni Arayışlar:
Kalkınma Ajansları ve Türkiye’de Uygulanabilirliği, Doğu Karadeniz Bölgesel
Kalkınma Sempozyumu, 2005.
<http://www.metinberber.ktu.edu.tr/linkler/kajans.pdf>,Last visited on 26.02.2006

Bernardo D., Valentin L., Leatherman J., Agri-tourism: If We Build It, Will They
Come? Risk&Profit Conference, Manhattan, 2004.
<http://uvm.edu/tourismresearch/agtour/publications/Kansas%20state%2study.pdf
>, Last visited on 14.02.2006

Beşinci Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı (1985-1989), DPT, Ankara, 1985.

<http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/plan/plan5.pdf>, Last visited on 26.01.2007)

Birlik, Kuvvet ve Yardımlaşmanın Tarımdaki Gücü: Kooperatifler, Tarım Orman

ve Köy İşleri Bakanlığı Dergisi No: 55, Eylül 1990

Blacka, A., Couture, P., Coale, C., Dooley, J., Hankins, A., Lastovica, A.,
Mihalik, B., Reed, C., Uysal, M., Agri-tourism, Virginia State University,

168
Virginia Cooperative Extension,Publication Number 310-003, 2001.
<http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/agritour/310-003/310-003.html>, Last visited on
11.11.2006

Bradth, B., Haugen, M.S., Emotional Work in Host- Guest Relations, Examples
From Farm Tourism, presented at the ‘Research Partners’ Meeting ‘Crossroads of
Tourism and Work’, Paper No 2/06, 2006,
<http://www.bygdeforskning.no/Publikasjoner_PDF/PAPER2.06.pdf>, Last
visited on 03.02.2006

Brunori, G., Rossi, A., Synergy and Coherence through Collective Action: Some
Insights from Wine Routes in Tuscany, Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 40, Number 4,
Pages 409-423, 2000

Brunori, G., Rossi, A., Vanni, F., Marketing Sustainable Agriculture: As Analysis
of the Potential Role of New Supply Chains in Sustainable Rural Development
Short Characterisation of FSCs in Italy, Dipartimento di gronomia e Gestione
dell’ Agroecosistema (DAGA)- Sezione Economia, Working Paper, 2002.
<http://www.agr.unipi.it/economia/dipartimento/rtf_paper/ShortCharacterization
of FSC.pdf>, Last visited on 07.12.2006

Buğday Ekolojik Yaşamı Destekleme Derneği Web Page,

<http://www.bugday.org.tr>, Last visited on 25.01.2006.

Busby,G., Rendle, S., The Transition From Tourism on Farms to Farm Tourism,
Tourism Management, Vol 21, No 8, Pages 635-642, 2000

Che, D., Veeck, A., Veeck, G., Sustaining Production and Strengthening the
Agritourism Product: Linkage Among Michigan Agritourism Destinations,
Agriculture and Human Values, Vol 22, Pages 225-234, 2005

169
Clarke, J. Farm Accomodation and the Communication Mix, Tourism
Management, Vol 17(8), Pages 611-620, (1996)

Clarke, J., Marketing structure for farm tourism: Beyond the individual provider
of rural tourism, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol7, No1, Pages 26-47, 1999

Coomber,L., Lim,C., Farm Tourism: A Preliminary Study of Participants’

Expectations and Perceptions of Farm Tours, IEMMSs Conference, Tapei,
2004.<http://www.iemss.org/iemss2004/pdf/ecotourism/coomfarm.pdf>, Last
visited on 10.02.2006

Çecik,Z., Cumhuriyet Türkiyesi’nde Toprak Reformu ve Uygulamaları,2002. <

http://w3.balikesir.edu.tr/~zcevik/toprak_reformu.php>, Last visited on
10.10.2007
Çevirgen, D., Çevirgen, A., Ekoturizm Yönetimi, 1st Ed., Nobel Yayınevi, Ankara,
2006.

Demşek, S., Effects of New Regional Policies on Turkish Regional Development:

The Case of Southern Eastern Anatolia Project, Unpublished Master Thesis,
Ankara, METU The Graduate School of Social Sciences, 2003

Dettori, G.D., Paba, A., Pulina, M., European Rural Tourism: Agrotouristic Firms
in Sardinia and Their Life Cycle, Centre for North South Economic Research,
University of Cagliari and Sassari Sardinia Working Paper, 2004.
<http://www.ideas.repec.org/i/a.html>, Last visited on 13.11.2006

DIE, (2003), T.C. Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü Kurumu. <http://www.tuik.gov.tr >,

Last visited on 23.08.2007

Djekic, S., Vucic, S., (2007), Some Structures and Principles of Rural Tourism,
Faculty of Economics, Nis, Serbia. <http://www.uni-
svishtov.bg/dialog/2007/2.07.SD.pdf>, Last visited on 13.08.2007

170
Dokuzuncu Kalkınma Planı (2007-2013), Kırsal Kalkınma Politikaları Özel
İhtisas Alt Komisyonu Raporu, DPT, Ankara, 2006.
<http://www.ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/plan/ix/9kalkinmaplani.pdf>, Last visited on
26.01.2007

Droy, M., Sustainable Tourism Development Through A Case Study: Champagne-

Ardenne, Published Doctorate Thesis, MA European Tourism Management
Bournemouth University, UK, 2003.
<http://www.du.se/upload/3648/ETM%20Thesis%20DROY.pdf>, Last visited on
12.11.2006

EC, (2000), Commission Notice to the Member States, Official Journal of the
European Communities.
<http://www.ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rur/leaderplus/pdf/library/methodology/139
_en.pdf>, Last visited on 13.11.2007

EC, (2002), Links Between the sustainable Development of Tourism and

Regional/Spatial Planning, European Regional Planning, No 64, Council of
Europe Publishing, F67075, Strasbourg, European Regional Planning, No 64,
Council of Europe Publishing, F67075, Strasbourg.

EC, (2006), Comparative Case Study IT: Rural Development Programme

Toskana- Rural Development Programme of Umbria, Pages 53-80.
<http://www.ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/reports/leader/ann2it.pdf>, Last visited
on 09.11.2006

Ecotourism Policy and Planning, 1st Ed., CABI Publishing, Trowbrigde, 2003

Erdoğan, N., Çevre ve (Eko)turizm, 1st Ed., Erk Yayınları, Ankara, 2003

ESPON Project 2.1.3., The Territorial Impact of CAP and Rural Development
Policy Final Report, The Arkleton Center for Rural Development Research,

171
Arbedeen,2004.<http://www.espon.eu/mmp/online/website/content/projects/243/2
77/file_1322/fr-2.1.3_revised_31-03-05.pdf>, Last visited on 03.01.2007

EU 2006, A Renewed EU Tourism Policy: Towards a Stronger Partnership for

European Tourism, Commission of the European Communities, 134 final,
Brussels.<http://www.ec.europa.eu/enterprise/services/tourism/doc/communicatio
ns/com2006_0134en01.pdf>, Last visited on 13.12.2006

European Centre for Ecological

and Agricultural Tourism Web Page, <http://www.eceat.org>, Last visited on
14.04.2007

European Commission Directorate- General for Agriculture Web Page,

<http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rur/leaderplus/intro_en.htm>, Last visited on
13.03.2007

European Comission Social Fund Web Page,

<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/esf/discover/esf_en.htm>, Last visited on
13.03.2007

Fleischer, A., Tehetchik, A., Does Rural Tourism Benefit From Agriculture?,
Tourism Management, Vol 26, Issue 4, Pages 493-501, 2005

Gartner, W.C., Rural Tourism Development in the USA, International Journal of

Tourism Research 6, Pages 151-164, 2004

GoogleEarth Web Page, <www.googleearth.com>, Last visited on 15.09.2007

Gössling, S., Mattsson, Susanne, Farm Tourism in Sweden: Structure, Growth

and Characteristics, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, Vol 2, No
1, Pages 17-30, 2002

172
Gunn, C.A., Var, T., Tourism Planning, Fourth Edition, Printed by Routledge,
New York, 2002

Gülçubuk, B., AB ve Türkiye’de Kırsal Yapı ve Kırsal Kalkınma, Ankara

Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Tarım Ekonomisi Bölümü, Ankara, 2005

Gümüş Güler, S., Işıklı, E., Türkiye’nin Kırsal Kalkınma Programları ve Bunların
Avrupa Birliği’ne Uyumu iel İlgiliDeğerlendirmeler, Türkiye İktisat Kongresi
Bölgesel Gelişme Stratejileri Tebliğ Metinleri, DPT, Ankara, 2004

Gündüz, S., Ankara İli Kalecik İlçesinde Tarımsal Turizme Uygun Olan Alanların
Saptanması ve Tarımsal Turizm Modelinin Oluşturulması Üzerine Bir Araştırma,
Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Ankara, Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri
Enstitüsü 2004

Gürsoy, S., Merkezi ve Yerel Yönetimler Açısından Bölgesel Turizm Planlaması,

Unpublished Master Thesis, Ankara, Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler
Enstitüsü, 2006

Hall, M. C., Page, S. J., The Geography of Tourism and Recreation, Printed By
Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, 2nd Edition, Eastbourne, 2002

Henke, R., Sardone, R., From the First to the Second Pillar of CAP: Hypotheses
of Direct Aid Modulation in Italy, Instituto Nazionale di Economia Agraria,
Working Paper, 2002. <http://www.inea.it/prin/risultati/wp26.pdf>, Last visited
on 09.11.2006

Hegarty, C., Przezborska, L., Rural and Agri-Tourism As a Tool for Reorganising
Rural Areas in Old and New Member States- A Comparision Study of Ireland and
Poland, International Journal of Tourism Research 7, Pages 63-77, 2005

173
Holdnak, A., Pennington-Gray, L., A., Case Study Florida’s Orange Groves,
P&R, Pages 146- 156, September 2000

Ilbery, B., Bowler, I., Clark, G., Crockett, A., Shaw, A., Farm Based Tourism as
an Alternative Farm Enterprise: A Case Study from the Northern Pennines,
England, Regional Studies, Vol 32.4, Pages 355-364, 1998

Ingram, G., Motivations of Farm Tourism Hosts and Guests in the South West
Tapestry Region, Western Australia: A phenomenological study, Indo-Pasific
Journal of Phenomenology, Vol 2, Ed 1, Pages 1-12, 2002

Inskeep, E., Tourism Planning, An Integrated and Sustainable Development

Approach, 1st Ed., Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,1991

Işık, N., Uçtu, R., Avrupa Birliği’ne Giriş Sürecinde Türk Tarımı ile AB Tarımının
Karşılaştırışması, Demokrasi Platformu Dergisi, No:3, Orient Yayınları, 2005

Ivona, A., Farm Tourism and Rural Development, A successful Combination? A

Local Experience, 2003.
<http://www.openstarts.units.it/dspace/bitstream/10077/867/1/f6ivona.pdf>, Last
visited on 26.11.2006

İncekara, A., Anadolu’da Yeni Turizm Olanakları ve Bölgesel Kalkınmadaki Yeri,

İstanbul Ticaret Odası Yayın No 2001-28, İstanbul, 2001

Lickorish, L.J., Jenkins, C. L., An Introduction to Tourism, First Edition,

Published by Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, 1997

Kahraman, N., Türkay, O., Turizm ve Çevre, 1st Ed., Detay Yayıncılık,
ANKARA, 2004

174
Karaburun Kaymakamlığı Resmi İnternet Sayfası,
<http://www.karaburun.gov.tr>, Last visited on 15.07.2007

Karaburun Web Sayfası, <http://www.karaburunizmir.net>, Last visited on

15.07.2007

Keith, D., Rilla, E., George, H., Lobo, R., Tourte, L., Ingram, R., Obstacles in the
Agritourism Regulatory Process: Perspectives of Operators and Officials in Ten
California Counties, University of California Publications, Number 22, 2003

Knickel, K., Renting, H., Methodological and Conceptual Issues in the Study of
Multifunctionality and Rural Development, Sociologica Ruralis, Vol 40, Number
4, Pages 512-528, 2000

Kniec, W., Pan-European System of Lifelong Learning Validation for Sustainable

Rural Development- Euro Validation, Nicolaus Copernicus University Institute of
Sociology Rural Sociology Department Publish Euro- Validation WP2 Final
Report, Torun, 2005

Kuntay, O., Sürdürülebilir Turizm Planlaması, 1st Ed., Alp Yayın Evi, Ankara,
2004

Küçükaltan, D., Tarım Turizmi ve Türkiye'de Tarım Turizmi İşletmeciliği, II.

Turizm Şurası, TC.Bakanlığı, Cilt:I, 143-159, Ankara, 2002

Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Web Page, <http://www.turizm.gov.tr>, Last visited

on 09.02.2007

Lane, B., Sustainable Rural Tourism Strategies: A Tool for Development and
Conservation, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol 2, Pages 12-18, 1994

175
Lowe, P., Murdoch, J., Marsden, T., Munton, R., Flynn, A., Regulating the New
Rural Spaces: The Uneven Development of Land, Journal of Rural Studies 9,
Pages 205-222, 1993

Manisa City Agriculure Administration Web Page,

<http://www.manisakulturturizm.gov.tr>, Last visited on 23.08.2007

Manisa Culture and Tourism Administration Web Page,

<http://www.manisakulturturizm.gov.tr>, Last visited on 23.08.2007

Mantino, F., Rural Development Policies in the EU: The Main Progress after
Agenda 2000 and the Challenges Ahead, Contributed paper presented at the
International Conference ‘Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO: Where Are
We Heading?, 2003

Marks-Bielska, R., Bialobrzeska, R., Factors Determining the Quality of Human

Resources in the Province of Warmia and Masuria, Rural Development 2003,
Proceedings of International Scientific Conference, Lithuanian University of
Agriculture and Lithuanian Institute of Agrarian Economics, 2003.
<http://ev.lzuu.lt/engl/docs/rural_dev_2003.pdf>, Last visited on 10.02.2007

McGehee, N. G., Kim, K., Motivation for Agri-tourism Entrepreneurship, Journal

of Tourism Research 6, Pages 162-170, 2004

Milli Tarımsal Kalkınma Stratejisi Hedef 2010, T.C. Tarım ve Köy İşleri
Bakanlığı Yayınları, Ankara, 2000

National Rural Development Strategy Document, 2006.

<http://rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/Eskiler/2006/02/20060204-9-2.pdf>, Last visited
on 11.05.2007

176
OECD, (2005a), Place-Based Policies For Rural Development Provinces of
Arezzo and Grosseto, Tuscany, Italy (Case Study).
<http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/57/22/35856049.pdf>, Last visited on 26.11.2006

OECD, (2005b), Non-Governmental Approaches for the Provision of Non-

Commodity Outputs and the Reduction of Negative Effects of Agriculture: A
synthesis Report.
<http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2005doc.nsf/8d00615172fd2a63c125685d005300b
5/709ffca87b427db1c125708200364780/$FILE/JT00189786.PDF>, Last visited
on 26.11.2006

OECD, (1994a), Territorial Indicators of Employment: Focusing on Rural

Development, OECD, Paris.
<http://www.oecd.org/finalDocument/0,2350,en_2649_34419_1_119699_1_1374
29,00.htm>, Last visited on 23.03.2007

OECD,(1994b), Tourism Strategies and Rural Development.

<https://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/27/2755218.pdf>, Last visited on 23.03.2007

OECD, (1996), Better Policies for Rural Development, OECD Publishing,

Paris

OECD, (2002), The Engagement of the Official Statistics in Monitoring the

Sustainable Agriculture in Italy.
<http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/18/37/1837843.pdf>, Last visited on 26.11.2006

OECD, (2005), New Approaches to Rural Policy, Lessons From Around the
World, OECD Publishing, Paris

177
Olalı, H., Nazilli, S.S., Kırcıoğlu, E.N. ve Sümer, M., Dış Tanıtım ve Turizm,
Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, Genel Yayın No: 253, Yonca Matbaası,
Ankara, 1983

Oppermann,M., Holidays on the Farm: A Case Study of German Hosts and

Guests, Journal of Travel Research, Vol.34, No.1, Pages.63-72, 1995

Özgüç, N., Turizm Coğrafyası Özellikler ve Bölgeler, 4th. Ed., Çantay Kitabevi,
İstanbul, 2003

Öztekin, N., Tarih Öncesi Karaburun, Tibyan Yayıncılık ve Matbaacılık, First

Edition, İzmir, 2006

Pirselimoğlu, Z., Ekolojik Temelli Rekreasyon ve Turizm Planlama İlkelerinin

Araştırılması: Trabzon İli Çalköyü Yayla Yerleşimi Örneği, Non-published Master
Thesis, KTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon, 2007
Polish Country Invites Web Page, <http://www.agroturystyka.pl/>, Last visited on
13.03.2007

Polish Ministry of Agriculture Web Page, < www.minrol.gov.pl>, Last visited on

11.05.2007

Rural Development Plan for Poland, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural

Development, Warsaw, 2005.
<http://www.minrol.gov.pl/FileRepozytory/FileRepozytoryShowImage.aspx?item
_id=11973>, Last visited on 03.02.2006

Rural Tourism International - Training Network Web Page,

<http://www.ruraltourisminternational.org>, Last visited on 13.03.2007

Sağcan, M., Rekreasyon ve Turizm, Cumhuriyet Basımevi, İzmir, 1986

178
Scherer, N., Klümpner E., Friedel, R., Continuative Survey on the Development of
Agrotourism in the Pomerania Region, Summary, Baltic+ Project, Institut für
Wirtschaftsentwicklung , 2005

Schilling, B. J., Marxen, L., Heinrich, H.H., Brooks, F.J.A., The Opportunity for
Agri-tourism Development in New Jersey, 2006.
<http://www.foodpolicyinstitute.org/docs/reports/Agritourism%20Development.p
df >, Last visited on 12.03.2007

Sector Profile Report of INTERREG IIIC Project, Lubelskie, Poland.

<http://www.schule.at/dl/sectorprofiles_PL.pdf >, Last visited on 10.02.2007

Sherer, N., Klümpner, E., Friedel, R., Continuative Survey on the Development of
Agrotourism in the Pomerania Region, Institut für Nachhaltige
Wirtschaftsentwicklung, 2005. <http://www.balticplus.se/site/illuer/illu_369.pdf>,
Last visited on 10.02.2007

Sırakaya, E., Sasidharan, V., Sönmez, S., Redefining Ecotourism: The Need for a
Supply-Side View, Journal of Travel Research, Vol 38, Pages 168-172, 1999

Sonnino, R., For a ‘Piece of Bread? Interpreting Sustainable Development

through Agri-Tourism in Southern Tuscany, Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 44, Number
3, Pages 285-300, 2004

Sugiarti, R., Ernawati, D., Birtles, A., The Potential for Developing Ecologically
Sustainable Rural Tourism in Surakarta, Indonesia, A Case Study, Asean Journal
on Hospitality and Tourism, Vol.2, Pages 78-90, 2003

Sustaining Agriculture and the Rural Environment,Governance, Policy and

Multifunctionality, 1st Ed., MPG Booksm Ltd, Cheltenham, UK, 2004

179
Szymoniuk,B., Rural Clusters in the Lublin Region (Eastern Poland) - Good
Solutions for a Young Democracy, ERSA Conference Papers , European Regional
Science Association, 2003.
<http://ideas.repec.org/r/bej/issued/v1y1997i0economides.html>, Last visited on
10.02.2007

Şahin, Y., Arazi Kullanım Planlaması ve Tarım Reformu Uygulamaları,

Türktarım Tarım ve Köy İşleri Bakanlığı Dergisi, No 160, Pages: 42-46, Ankara,
2007

Telfer,D.J.,Wall, G., Linkages Between Tourism and Food Production, Annals of

Tourism Research, Vol 23(3), Pages 635-653, 1996

Terluin, I.J., Venema, G.S., Towards Regional Differentiation of Rural

Development Policy in the EU, The Hauge: Agricultural Economics Research
Institute (LEI), 2003

Tesbi, M. A., Türkiye’de Tarımsal Kooperatifçilik Hareketinin Gelişimi Sorunları

ve Çözüm Yolları, Verimlilik Dergisi, Milli Prodüktivite Yayını, Ankara, 2000/1

Tezcan, B., Developing Alternative Modes of Tourism in Turkey, Unpublished

Master Thesis, Ankara, The Graduate School of Sciences, 2004

The Common Agricultural Policy, 2nd Ed., Ed. By Ritson, C., Harvey, D.R., CAB
International, UK, 1997

The Cork Declaration - A living countryside, The European Conference on Rural

Development, 1996. <http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rur/cork_en.htm>, Last
visited on 5.11.2006

Timothy, D.J., Cooperative Tourism Planning in a Developing Destination,

Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol 6, No 1, Pages: 52-68, 1998

180
Topal, Ç., An Inquiry into Rural Development Non-Governmental Organizations
in Turkey: Degree of Institutionalization and Socio-Economic Characteristics of
Employees, Unpublished Master Thesis, Ankara, METU, The Graduate School of
Sciences, 2004

Trauger, A., Women Farmers in Minnesota and the Post- Productivist Transition,
The Great Lakes Geographer, Vol 8, No 2, 2001

Turistik Düzenleme, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Eğitim Dairesi Başkanlığı

Yayınları, No:49, Ankara, 1983

Turizmi Çeşitlendirmek, TÜRSAB Ar-Ge Departmanı, 2005. Türkiye Seyahat

Acentaları Birliği Web Page, <http://www.tursab.org.tr>, Last visited on
02.06.2007

Turnock, D., Rural Diversification in Eastern Europe: Introduction, GeoJournal

46, Pages 171-181, 1999

Tutar,E., Tutar, F., Turizm Sektörünün Ekonomiye Katkıları Açısından Türkiye'nin

OECD Ülkeleri İçerisindeki Yeri, Turizm, Ekonomi, Türkiye ve OECD, 1st Ed.,
Seçkin Yayıncılık San. Ve Tic. A.Ş., Ankara, 2004

Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Web Page, <http://www.tuik.gov.tr>, Last visited on

13.07.2007

Türkiye Turizm Stratejisi (2023), Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, Ankara, 2007.

<http://www.sp.gov.tr/documents/Turizm_Strateji_2023.pdf>, Last visited on
26.01.2007

Uçar,D., Doğru,A., CBS Projelerinin Stratejik Planlanması ve SWOT Analizinin

Yeri, TMMOB Harita ve Kadastro Mühendisleri Odası 10. Türkiye Harita
Bilimsel Teknik Kurultayı, Ankara, 28 Mart-1Nisan 2005.

181
<http://www.hkmo.org.tr/resimler/etkinlikbildirileri/99_ek.pdf >, Last visited on
13.08.2007

Uçkun, G., Türkay, O., (2003), Alternatif Turizm Türlerinin Sürdürülebilirliği,

Turizm Forumu. <http://www.turizmforumu.net>, Last visited on 29.01.2007

Ulusal Kırsal Kalkınma Stratejisi (2007-2013), DPT, Ankara, 2007.

<http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/bolgesel/strateji/kirsal.pdf>, Last visited on 27.01.2006

Uzun Vadeli Strateji ve Sekizinci Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı (2001,2005), DPT,
Ankara, 2000. <http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/plan/viii/plan8str.pdf>, Last visited on
27.01.2006

Var, T., The State, The Private Sector and Tourism Policies in Turkey,
Mediterranean Tourism Facets of Socioeconomic Development and Cultural
Change, Routledge Publishments, 1st Edition, London, 2001

Veeck, G. Che, D., Veeck, A., America’s Changing Farmscape: A Study of

Agricultural Tourism in Michigan, The Professional Geographer, Vol 58(3),
Pages 235-248, 2006

Veer, M., Tuunter, E., Rural Tourism in Europe An Exploration of Success and
Failure Factors, Stichting Recreative, Expert and Innovation Centre Publishment,
2005.<http://www.stichtingrecreatie.nl/english/Rapport%20Engels%20_definitief
_ pdf>, Last visited on 21.01.2007

Walford Nigel, A Past and A Future For Diversification on Farms? Some

Evidence From Large-Scale, Commercial Farms in South East England,
Geografiska Annaler, 85 B (2), Pages 51-62

Walukiewicz, S., Institutional Settings for Networking in Poland, Contribution to

the 42nd European Congress of the Regional Science Association, Dortmund,

182
2002. <http:/www/ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa02p491.html>, Last visited
on 20.01.2007

Wicks, B.E., Merrett, C.D., Agritourism: An Economic Opportunity for Illinois,

Rural Research Report published by the Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs, Vol 14,
Issue 9, 2003. <http://www.iira.org/pubsnew/publications/IIRA_RRR_577.pdf>,
Last visited on 28.09.2006

Williams, P., Paridaen, M., Dossa, K., Dumais, M., Agri-tourism Market and
Product Development Status Report, Center for Tourism Policy and Research
Simon Fraser University Web Page, 2001. <http://www.
rem.sfu.ca/pdf/agritourism.pdf>, Last visited on 21.12.2006

Wilson, G.A., Hart, K., Farmer Participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes:

Towards Conservation- Oriented Thinking?, Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 41, Number
2, Pages 254-274, 2001

Wolfe, K., Holland, R., (2002), Considerations for Agritainment Enterprise for
Georgia. < http://www.agecon.uga.edu/~caed/agritourism.htm>, Last visited on
21.02.2007

WTO, 2005, WTO Seminar “Rural Tourism in Europe: Experiences and

Perspectives”,Belgrade,2002.
<http://www.unwto.org/regional/europe/PDF/rural_en.pdf>, Last visited on
10.02.2007

Yedinci Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı (1996-2000), DPT, Ankara, 1996.

<http://.ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/plan/vii/ >, Last visited on 26.01.2007

Yıldırım, Ş., Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye’de Tarımsal Yapı ve Verimlilik, Tam

Üyelik Açısından Bir Değerlendirme, Milli Prodüktivite Merkezi Yayınları No:
659, Ankara, 2001

183
Yılmaz, C., Avrupa Birliği Müzakere Süreci ve Tarım Sektörü, Demokrasi
Platformu Dergisi, No:3, Orient Yayınları, 2005

II. Tarım Şurası Kırsal Kalkınma Politikaları Komisyon Raporu.

<http://www.tarimsurasi.tarim.gov.tr/PDFLER/VIII.Komisyon.pdf>, Last visited

on15.08.2007

184
 APPENDIX A

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE PROJECT

COORDINATORS:

1. Could please give information about the beginning of the project?

2. Could you please explain the aim of the study clearly?
3. Could you please make a definition of rural tourism and agri-tourism?
4. What is your job and what is your role in this project?
5. Why are you interested in rural tourism development?
6. What are the reasons for deciding upon these villages? What are the
identical properties of this villages related to agri-tourism?
7. What are the tourism potentials of this project aiming to improve in
this project? How did they identify?
8. Do the residents of the village/villages have tendencies for innovations
and development? If your answer is yes, how did it identified?
9. What are the partners of this project?
10. How did they participate to the project?
11. Did you visit any other agri-tourism or rural tourism development
areas in Turkey or world?
12. What types of activities were done in the passed time of the project?
13. Who did decide upon these activities? Could you please mention about
the decision-making process?
14. Is there an action plan for the development of the project?
15. Is a planning study necessary for the future of the project? Why?
16. Could you please say about the details of the plan? In other words,
which elements or what are have to plan?
17. Is there a relationship between organic production and tourism
development in this project?

185
18. Could you please tell about the main problems and the primary
necessities for the future of the project?
19. Is there any legislative support of this project?
20. What is the financial support of this project?
21. Is there a responsible institution, unit or person monitoring the
implications and developments in the project?
22. Why and how the cooperation and association did establish? Could you
please give information about the cooperation structure and current
situation?
23. Is there a potential target group of the project?
24. What types of official supports are given for the project?
25. How many people related to tourism in the village/villages?
26. Could you please give information about the facility numbers, bed
numbers of the accommodation units and tourist numbers?
27. Could you please give information about the public services taking
place in the villages for the daily tourists such as catering,
communication, and health?
28. When the tourism develops here, what conditions may be danger for the
future of the project and the village?
29. Is there a necessity for some precautions and limitations for some
activities? Why? If your answer is yes, what are they?
30. Who did take active role in the implementation of the decisions in the
villages?
31. Finally, could you please tell about the demands from the government
and state for the development of the project?

186
 APPENDIX B

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE AGRI-TOURISM

ENTREPRENEURS:

1. What is your education degree?

2. What is your income resource?
3. What are the agricultural products producing in your village?
4. Could you please make a definition of agri-tourism?
5. Before this project, did you hear/learn about the existence of a tourism
form called agri-tourism?
6. Why are you interested in agri-tourism? How did you decide to be a
tourism operator?
7. What kind of tourism services are you serving or thinking to serve?
8. Did you have education about tourism and being tourism
entrepreneur?
9. Did you have any investment for agri-tourism?
10. What kind of tourists do you accept to your accommodation facility?
11. How many tourists accommodated in your facility?
12. Are you pleased with the income?
13. Which members of your family interested in agri-tourism development?
14. Are you pleased to be a member of this project?
15. Could you please tell about your positive and negative decisions about
this project?
16. What else from investing for accommodation facility are you doing
developing of the project?
17. What are your main problems and expectations?
18. Have you got any credit support? Is it enough?
19. What kind of tourism activities should be operating in your village?
20. Did you visit any other agri-tourism facility?

187